alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00397-CR

Brittni Colleps

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 432nd District Court

of Tarrant County (1249417D)

April 3, 2014

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

GLORIA DENISE BEASLEY, 

 Plaintiff, Case No. 14-14386 

 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

v. 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL 

SECURITY, 

 Defendant. 

_________________________________/ 

JUDGMENT 

For the reasons stated in the Order issued on this date, it is ORDERED and 

ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, 

Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and the Commissioner’s 

decision is AFFIRMED. This case is hereby DISMISSED in its entirety with 

prejudice. 

 s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: March 21, 2016 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties 

and/or counsel of record on March 21, 2016, by electronic means and/or ordinary 

mail. 

 s/Holly A. Monda 

 Case Manager 

 (313) 234-5113 

2:14-cv-14386-MFL-MKM Doc # 21 Filed 03/21/16 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 559
# C_2011347EN.01001001.xml

| 26.11.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/10

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Giessen (Germany) lodged on 1 September 2011 — Natthaya Dülger v District of Wetterau

(Case C-451/11)

2011/C 347/15

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Giessen

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Natthaya Dülger

Applicant:

Defendant: District of Wetterau

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

May a Thai national, who was married to a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State and who, after receiving authorisation to join him, lived with him without interruption for more than three years, rely on the rights arising from the first indent of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council, with the consequence that she has a right of residence because of the direct effect of that provision?

---
§ 159.003-5 Approval by the Coast Guard under a Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA). ( a ) Manufacturers must specify in writing that foreign approval under an MRA is requested.
( b ) The Coast Guard Certificate of Approval will clearly identify as specified in the MRA that the product is approved to the foreign requirements under the MRA.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7753

THOMAS LATTIE MCLAMB,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

W. F. DALIUS, Warden; KATHLEEN HAWK-SAWYER,

Director; J. FRANK BRADSHER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief

District Judge. (CA-03-662-5-BO)

Submitted: January 29, 2004 Decided: February 9, 2004

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Lattie McLamb, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of

Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Lattie McLamb appeals the district court’s order

and order on reconsideration denying his Bivens* claim. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm on the

reasoning of the district court. See McLamb v. Dalius, No. CA-03-

662-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Sept. 8 & Oct. 7, 2003). 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
#### Fay Arnold v. The State.

*No. 6660.*

*Decided April 26.*

1. Vagrancy—Evidence.—The rule is elementary that if an offense is laid generally in an indictment or information, evidence of general reputation to prove such offense is not admissible; the particular facts which constitute the offense must be-proved. The information in this case, in general terms, charged the accused with being a vagrant, to-wit, a common prostitute, and upon the trial the court admitted evidence of general reputation to support the charge. *Held,*error, and that it devolved upon the-State to prove the particular facts showing the accused to be a common prostitute.

2. Same.—Over defendant’s objection the State was permitted to prove the bad character of the women who lived in the vicinity in Avhich the defendant lived, and with whom she sometimes associated. *Held,*that the proof was incompetent and irrelevant, and its admission was material error.

Appeal from the County Court of Cooke. Tried below before Hon. H. S. Holman, County Judge.

The' opinion sufficiently discloses the case. The penalty assessed by the verdict ivas a fine of ten dollars.

*A. M. Thomason,*for appellant.

*W. L. Davidson,*Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Willson, Judge.

This conviction is for being a vagrant, to-wit, a common prostitute, and the information charges the offense in general terms in the language of the statute.

*481Over defendant’s objections, the State was permitted to prove that the defendant’s general reputation in the community in which she resided was that she was a common prostitute. It was material error to admit this testimony. Where an offense is laid generally in an indictment or information, evidence of general reputation to prove such offense is not admissible; the particular facts which constitute the offense must be proved. ‘In this case it devolved upon the State to prove the particular facts showing that defendant was a common prostitute. This proof could not be made by evidence of her general reputation in that respect. Whart. Crim. Ev., 9 ed., sec. 260.

It was also material error to permit the State to prove, over defendant’s objections, the bad character of the women who resided in the vicinity of defendant’s residence, and with whom the defendant sometimes associated. Such evidence was irrelevant and incompetent. Holsey v. The State, 24 Texas Ct. App., 35.

There is no evidence in the record, except the illegal evidence above mentioned, proving or even tending to prove that the defendant was a common prostitute.

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*

Judges all present and concurring.
Editorial Note on Part 154
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 154.1818 Certification of inhibition. ( a ) Except as provided in § 154.1740(b), no person may operate a vessel carrying butadiene or vinyl chloride without carrying in the wheelhouse written certification from the shipper that the product is inhibited.
( b ) The certification required by this section must contain the following information: ( 1 ) The name and concentration of the inhibitor.
( 2 ) The date the inhibitor was added.
( 3 ) The expected duration of the inhibitor's effectiveness.
( 4 ) Any temperature limitations qualifying the inhibitor's effective lifetime.
( 5 ) The action to be taken if the time of the voyage exceeds the inhibitor's lifetime.
EXHIBIT
4.1


 


Executive service agreement –
Mr Frank J Cicutto


 


The executive service agreement of Mr Frank J Cicutto is incorporated
by reference to National Australia Bank Limited’s Annual Report on Form 20-F
for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Commission
on March 26, 2004.
MIE (Rev. 9/09) Order Regarding Reassignment of Companion Case - Civil

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Plaintiff(s), Case No. 

v. Honorable

Magistrate Judge

Defendant(s).

/

ORDER REGARDING REASSIGNMENT OF COMPANION CASE

This case appears to be a companion case to Case No. . Pursuant to E.D. Mich LR

83.11, the Clerk is directed to reassign this case to the docket of the Honorable

and Magistrate Judge .

United States District Judge

United States District Judge

Pursuant to this order, case assignment credit will be given to the appropriate Judicial Officers.

Case type:

If the District Judge assigned to the companion case is located at another place of holding court, the office

code will be changed accordingly.

Date:

Deputy Clerk

cc: Parties and/or counsel of record

Honorable

RICHARD GOLDEN, ET AL.,

JANG H. LIM,

15-10795

Judith E. Levy

Mona K. Majzoub

09-13561

Patrick J. Duggan

Mona K. Majzoub

CIVIL

March 10, 2015 s/ S Schoenherr

Judith E. Levy

s/Judith E. Levy

s/Patrick J. Duggan

Patrick J. Duggan

Patrick J. Duggan

2:15-cv-10795-PJD-MKM Doc # 2 Filed 03/10/15 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 132
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, I, Barry L. Lazarus, the Chief Financial Officer of Inland Retail Real Estate Trust, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify that:

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 (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.                                                               



|    | /s/ BARRY L. LAZARUS   
|--- | -----------------------
|    |                        
|    |                        
|By: | Barry L. Lazarus       
|    | Chief Financial Officer
|    | Date: August 7, 2004
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 2, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 24264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2157]


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

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT


Notice of Public Information Collection Requirements Submitted to 
OMB for Review

    Summary: U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has 
submitted the following information collections to OMB for review and 
clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. 
Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of 
having their full effect if received within 30 days of this 
notification. Comments should be sent via e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6125001708053e330e12150a0413210e0c034f040e114f060e17"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="92d6f3e4fbf6cdc0fde1e6f9f7e0d2fdfff0bcf7fde2bcf5fde4">[email protected]</span></a> or fax to 202-395-7285. Copies of submission may be 
obtained by calling (202) 712-1365.
    Supplementary Information:
    OMB Number: OMB 0412-0566.
    Form Number: AID 200-1.
    Title: PVO Classification Form.
    Type of Submission: Reinstatement.
    Purpose: The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) 
requires all private voluntary organizations (PVOs) that wish to be 
eligible to compete for most forms of foreign economic assistance 
administered by USAID to register with the Agency. Registration 
provides a resource for USAID officials to access financial and program 
information on PVOs. The PVO Registry is a central clearinghouse for 
information on PVOs working in countries where elsewhere the U.S. 
Government would not have knowledge of the activities. To confirm the 
data is collected in a formalized and consistent manner, USAID has 
developed the Classification Form's list of sectors and countries that 
will show where qualified and interested PVOs registered with USAID are 
working.
    Annual Reporting Burden:
    Respondents: 594.
    Total annual responses: 594.
    Total annual hours requested: 132 hours.

    Dated: April 25, 2007.
Joanne Paskar,
Chief, Information and Records Division, Office of Administrative 
Services, Bureau for Management.
[FR Doc. 07-2157 Filed 5-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
1... This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2009-CR-6566, styled State v. Jason Miears, pending in the 379th

Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Ron Rangel presiding.

i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-09-00803-CR

IN RE Jason MIEARS

Original Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 23, 2009

PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION DENIED

On December 14, 2009, relator Jason Miears filed a petition for writ of prohibition,

complaining the 379th Judicial District Court does not have jurisdiction over the pending criminal

proceeding. The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of prohibition and is of the opinion

that relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of prohibition is

DENIED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). 

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.056-3 Fittings and equipment. ( a ) *Fittings.* ( 1 ) The rescue boat shall be fitted with one pair of rowlock sockets. Detachable rowlocks shall be permanently attached to the boat by chain or other suitable means.
( 2 ) At least one eyebolt, ring, or other fitting suitable for attaching a painter shall be fitted to the bow and stern.
( b ) *Equipment.* ( 1 ) The rescue boat shall be provided with one pair of oars of suitable size and material.
( 2 ) A painter shall be attached to the bow and to the stern fittings. Each shall be of suitable material, at least 3 ⁄ 8-inch in diameter, and at least 30 feet long.
#### Jane Berry, *Plaintiff, v.*The Village of Watkins, *Defendant.*

Motion for a new trial denied. J udgment ordered for plaintiff on Verdict, with costs.
**Exhibit ITEM****32.1**

SECTION 906CERTIFICATION

Thecertification set forth below is being submitted to the Securities and ExchangeCommission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350 of Chapter 63of Title 18 of the United States Code.

March22, 2007

CharlesT. Chrietzberg, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of Northern CaliforniaBancorp, Inc. certifies:

a.               that thisperiodic report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

b.              thatinformation contained in this periodic report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of NorthernCalifornia Bancorp, Inc.

 
|   | /s/ Charles T. Chrietzberg, Jr. |   |
|--------|---------------------------------|--------|
|   | Charles T. Chrietzberg, Jr.     |
|   | Chief Executive Officer         |
|   | and President                   |

 

----
#### § 169.571 Odorizing units.

Each carbon dioxide extinguishing system installed or altered after July 9, 2013, must have an approved odorizing unit to produce the scent of wintergreen, the detection of which will serve as an indication that carbon dioxide gas is present in a protected area and any other area into which the carbon dioxide may migrate. “Altered” means modified or refurbished beyond the maintenance required by the manufacturer's design, installation, operation and maintenance manual.

[USCG-2006-24797, 77 FR 33890, June 7, 2012]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 2, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 24322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2150]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Digestive Diseases Core 
Centers.
    Date: June 15, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Renaissance Mayflower Hotel, 1127 Connecticut Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20036.
    Contact Person: Maria E. Davila-Bloom, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of 
Health, Room 758, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, 
(301) 594-7637, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#492d283f202528642b2526262424092c313d3b286727202d2d2267272021672e263f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0c686d7a65606d216e60636361614c6974787e6d22626568686722626564226b637a">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: April 25, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-2150 Filed 5-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2012319EN.01001001.xml

| 20.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 319/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 319/10

---

Order of the General Court of 6 September 2012 — Gozi v Commission

(Case T-519/11 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Request for assistance - Commission decision not to reimburse to the applicant the costs incurred in proceedings before a national criminal court - Appeal partly clearly inadmissible and partly clearly unfounded)

2012/C 319/17

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Sandro Gozi (Soglianó Al Rubicone, Italy) (represented by: G. Passalacqua and G. Calcerano, lawyers)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and J. Baquero Cruz, agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 20 July 2011 in Case F-116/10 Gozi v Commission, not yet reported, seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Gozi

Commission

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Sandro Gozi is ordered to bear his own costs and those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Sandro Gozi is ordered to bear his own costs and those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 347, 26.11.2011.

1

---
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 20 22

- 4178

_____________________________
D EMETRIS A NTUAN W ALLACE , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. William E. Davis , Judge

.

April 12, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
B.L. T HOMAS , M.K. T HOMAS , and T ANENBAUM , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Danielle Jorden, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
#### Clarence V. KNIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M. CASTELLAW, Correctional Lt.; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 03-16870.

D.C. No. CV-00-02016-SBA.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 10, 2004.*

Decided May 20, 2004.

*791Clarence V. Knight, Soledad, CA, pro se.

Sara Turner, Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before CANBY, KOZINSKI, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

California state prisoner Clarence V. Knight appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of prison officials in Knight’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that, during a modified lockdown following a prison riot, defendants forced him to choose between exercising his constitutional right of access to the courts or his constitutional right to regular outdoor exercise. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review summary judgment de novo. *Bahrampour v. Lampert,*356 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

Because the evidence shows that during the course of the modified lockdown Knight used the prison law library, amended his complaint in another district court action, and successfully filed his complaint in this action, he failed to demonstrate that he was denied access to the courts. *See Lewis v. Casey,*518 U.S. 343, 349, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996). Furthermore, because the evidence shows that during each week of May and June 2000, Knight had between two and six hours of outdoor exercise, he failed to demonstrate a deprivation of his Eighth Amendment rights to outdoor exercise. *See May v. Baldwin,*109 F.3d 557, 565 (9th Cir.1997) (“a temporary denial of outdoor exercise with no medical effects is not a substantial deprivation.”). Knight therefore failed to show an essential element of his § 1983 claim and, accordingly, the district court did not err when it granted summary judgment. *See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,*477 U.S. 317, 322, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986).

Knight’s remaining contentions are also without merit.

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.