alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under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. R. 47.5.4.

-1-

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Consolidated Case Nos. 01-60051, 01-60052, 01-60053, 01-60054,

01-60055, 01-60056, 01-60057, 01-60058, 01-60059, 01-60060, 

01-60061, 01-60062, 01-60063, 01-60064, 01-60239, 01-60240, 

01-60241, 01-60242, 01-60259

BANK ONE, N.A.,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

BESSIE LAKE, ROBBIE HAYMER, CALVIN EPPS, WILLIE JONES, OSCAR

MCDONALD, BOBBIE HARRIS; DIANE HARRIS, GEORGE BEACHAM; JOYCE

BEACHAM, BARRY BLACKSTONE; TERESA BLACKSTONE, CLARENCE COATES,

SHIRLEY EVANS, TANYA GEORGE; BARRY GEORGE, MABLE GRIFFIN, MARY

MEEKS, WILLIE COOK, MARY BUCHANAN, PHILOMENA COWEN, CHARLES

MALLETT, HENRY HORTON AND MINNIE DONALDSON,

Defendants-Appellants.

Appeals from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Mississippi

( 5:00-CV-227-BN, et al )

April 5, 2002

Before REAVLEY, HIGGINBOTHAM and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*
-2-

Appellants challenge the district court’s ruling granting Bank

One’s Motions to Compel Arbitration and denying their motions for

joinder and dismissal, discovery, and abstention. After hearing

oral arguments, and considering the briefs and record excepts, the

judgments of the district court granting Bank One’s Motions to

Compel Arbitration and denying the Appellant’s motions for joinder

and dismissal, discovery, and abstention are affirmed for

essentially the reasons stated in our opinion in Bank One, N.A. v.

Boyd, 00-60805, and the reasons stated by the district court in its

January 2, 2001, opinion in Bank One, N.A. v. Coates, 3:00-cv671LN.

AFFIRMED.
###### Editorial Note on Part 153

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 153 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50465, 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 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 153.436 Heat transfer fluids: compatibility with cargo.

A heat transfer fluid separated from the cargo by only one wall (for example, the heat transfer fluid in a coil within a tank) must be compatible with the cargo under the standards prescribed for compatibility between two cargoes in Part 150 of this chapter.

[CGD 81-078, 50 FR 21174, May 22, 1985]
# C_2011282EN.01005301.xml

| 24.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/53

---

Action brought on 25 July 2011 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-73/11)

2011/C 282/101

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Rodrigues, C. Bernard-Glanz and A. Blot, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision not to admit the applicant to the assessment centre stage of the open competition EPSO/AD/181/10.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the European Union Civil Service Tribunal should:

| — | Annul the decision of the European Personnel Selection Office (hereinafter, EPSO) of 20 August 2010 and 15 September 2010, informing him that he was not admitted to the assessment centre stage of the open competition EPSO/AD/181/10 (hereinafter, the contested decision); |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the European Personnel Selection Office (hereinafter, EPSO) of 20 August 2010 and 15 September 2010, informing him that he was not admitted to the assessment centre stage of the open competition EPSO/AD/181/10 (hereinafter, the contested decision);

| — | together with, and so far as necessary, annul the EPSO decision of 15 April 2011, rejecting his complaint of 10 November 2010 against the aforementioned decision (hereinafter, the rejection decision); |
| --- | --- |

—

together with, and so far as necessary, annul the EPSO decision of 15 April 2011, rejecting his complaint of 10 November 2010 against the aforementioned decision (hereinafter, the rejection decision);

| — | consequently, order his reintegration into the selection process, if necessary by the implementation of a new round of tests; |
| --- | --- |

—

consequently, order his reintegration into the selection process, if necessary by the implementation of a new round of tests;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [FDA 225-07-8001]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is providing notice of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between FDA and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the National Institutes of Health of the Department of Health and Human Services. The purpose of this MOU is to establish a formal collaboration between FDA and NCI regarding proteomics science and technology to accelerate proteomics technology development and application in clinical settings. FDA and NCI intend to collaborate in areas involving proteomics such as: Sample collection, preparation, storage and processing; bioinformatics and data analysis; discovery and validation of biomarkers; and surrogate biomarkers of cancer development and drug response, including standardization among technology platforms and assay standards development.

# DATES:

The agreement became effective April 5, 2007.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Francis Kalush, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ-440), Food and Drug Administration, 2098 Gaither Rd., Rockville, MD  20850, 240-276-0996, e-mail:                         *francis.kalush@fda.hhs.gov*.                    

or Henry Rodriguez, Office of the Director, (MSC-2580), National Cancer Institute, 31 Center Dr., rm. 10A52, Bethesda, MD  20892, 301-496-1550.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In accordance with 21 CFR 20.108(c), which states that all written agreements and MOUs between FDA and others shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    , the agency is publishing notice of this MOU.                

Dated: April 20, 2007.

Jeffrey Shuren,

Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

      ( print page 21272)          ( print page 21273)          ( print page 21274)          ( print page 21275)          ( print page 21276)          ( print page 21277)    

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S

[FR Doc. 07-2106 Filed 4-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-C
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief
Executive Officer of Thinkpath Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies that to the
best of my knowledge:

           (a)       The Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
                     period ended September 30, 2002 (the "Report"), to which
                     this certification is attached as an exhibit, fully
                     complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
                     the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

           (b)       The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                     all material respects, the financial condition and results
                     of operations of the Company.


/s/  Declan French
-----------------------
Declan French
Chief Executive Officer

November 19, 2002
-----------------------
# C_2008166EN.01001801.xml

| 1.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 166/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 166/18

---

SCHEDULE OF PUBLIC HOLIDAYS FOR 2010

SCHEDULE OF PUBLIC HOLIDAYS FOR 2010

(2008/C 166/04)

| 1 January | Friday, New Year's Day |
| --- | --- |
| 1 April | Maundy Thursday |
| 2 April | Good Friday |
| 5 April | Easter Monday |
| 13 May | Thursday, Ascension Day |
| 14 May | Friday, day following Ascension Day |
| 24 May | Whit Monday |
| 21 July | Wednesday, Belgian National Holiday |
| 1 November | Monday, All Saints' Day |
| 2 November | Tuesday, All Souls' Day |
| 23 December to | Thursday | 7 days: Christmas and end of year |
| 31 December | Friday |

1 January

Friday, New Year's Day

1 April

Maundy Thursday

2 April

Good Friday

5 April

Easter Monday

13 May

Thursday, Ascension Day

14 May

Friday, day following Ascension Day

24 May

Whit Monday

21 July

Wednesday, Belgian National Holiday

1 November

Monday, All Saints' Day

2 November

Tuesday, All Souls' Day

23 December to

Thursday

7 days: Christmas and end of year

31 December

Friday

TOTAL: 17 days

LUXEMBOURG: the above-mentioned dates also apply to Luxembourg, except that Wednesday, 21 July is replaced by Wednesday, 23 June, Luxembourg National Holiday.

Work will resume as normal on Monday 3 January 2011.

The Commission reserves the right to modify the decisions, should the needs of service so require.

---
# C_2014253EN.01006601.xml

| 4.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 253/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 253/66

---

Order of the General Court of 10 June 2014 — Makhlouf v Council

(Cases T-433/11 and T-98/12) (1)

1

2014/C 253/90

Language of the case: French

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 290, 1.10.2011.

1

---
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Office of Women's Health is announcing the following meeting:   “Workshop to Develop a Women's Health Information Sharing Network” to discuss opportunities for national organizations to share information about their women's health education activities.  There will be two meetings.  One will focus on Hispanic/Latina populations, and the other will focus on all other communities.  Representatives of national community-based organizations are invited.  A continental breakfast will be provided.

*Date and Time*:   The meetings will be held on April 12 and 13, 2007, from 8:30 am to 11:30 am.                

*Location*: The meetings will be held at AARP, 601 East St., NW., Washington, DC 20049.                

*Contact*:  Susana Perry, FDA Office of Women's Health (HF-8), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, rm. 16-65, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-0350, FAX:  301-827-9194, e-mail:                     *susana.perry@fda.hhs.gov*.                

*Registration*:  There is no fee, but pre-registration is required for security purposes by AARP.  Seating is limited to 20 participants for each meeting.                

If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Susana Perry at least 7 days in advance (by April 6, 2007).

Dated: March 23, 2007.

Jeffrey Shuren,

Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-1546 Filed 3-27-07; 8:50 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
# C_2011130EN.01001804.xml

| 30.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/18

---

Action brought on 2 March 2011 — Legré v Council

(Case T-123/11)

2011/C 130/35

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Thierry Legré (Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire) (represented by: J. -C. Tchikaya, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Council Decision 2011/18/CFSP of 14 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/656/CFSP renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire, and Council Regulation (EU) No 25/2011 of 14 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire, to the extent that they concern the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision 2011/18/CFSP of 14 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/656/CFSP renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire, and Council Regulation (EU) No 25/2011 of 14 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire, to the extent that they concern the applicant;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments raised by the applicant are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-118/11 Attey v Council.

Attey

Council

---
§ 190.05-20 Segregation of chemical laboratories and chemical storerooms. ( a ) The provisions of this section shall apply to all vessels contracted for on or after March 1, 1968.
( b ) Chemical storerooms shall not be located in horizontal proximity to nor below accommodation or safety areas.
( c ) Chemical storerooms shall not be located adjacent to the collision bulkhead, nor boundary divisions of the boilerroom, engineroom, galley, or other high fire hazard area.
( d ) Chemical laboratories shall not be located adjacent to nor immediately below safety areas. Wherever possible they shall be similarly separated from accommodation spaces and high fire hazard areas such as the galley.
[CGFR 67-83, 33 FR 1125, Jan. 27, 1968, as amended by USCG-2014-0688, 79 FR 58289, Sept. 29, 2014]
#### UNITED STATES of America, v. Tyrone BENTLEY, a/k/a Tyrone Harris Tyrone Bentley, Appellant.

No. 03-1935.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) May 28, 2004.

Decided June 2, 2004.

Lesley B. Fitzgerald, Office of United States Attorney, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellee.

Elaine DeMasse, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellant.

Before SCIRICA, Chief Judge, FISHER and ALARCÓN,* Circuit Judges.

*

 The Honorable Arthur L. Alarcon, Senior Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.

OPINION OF THE COURT

FISHER, Circuit Judge.

Tyrone Bentley claims, for the first time on this appeal, that he should not have received a two-level upward adjustment in his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2. The standard of review is plain error. Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(b); *United States v. Torres,*209 F.3d 308, 313 (3d Cir.2000).

The government concedes that the sentencing enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2 should not have been applied in this case, as the defendant was fleeing from armored car employees, not law enforcement officials.

The government agrees that the erroneous application of § 3C1.2 warrants a remand to permit resentencing. We will therefore vacate the judgment of sentence in this case and remand the matter for resentencing.
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, Case No. 15-cr-20146 

 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

v. 

OCTAVEOUS MELVIN GORDON, 

 

 Defendant. 

__________________________________________________________________/ 

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

FOR COMPASSIONATE RELEASE (ECF No. 38) 

 Defendant Octaveous Melvin Gordon is a federal prisoner incarcerated at FCI 

Greenville in Greenville, Illinois. On June 9, 2021, Gordon filed a motion for 

compassionate release from custody pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). (See 

Mot., ECF No. 38) In his motion, Gordon seeks release based on his concerns about 

the COVID-19 pandemic and his underlying health conditions. (See id.) 

 On November 8, 2021, the Court directed Gordon to supplement his motion 

by answering certain questions regarding his COVID-19 vaccination status. (See 

Order, ECF No. 39.) Gordon responded to the Court’s questions on November 26, 

2021. (See Resp., ECF No. 40.) Gordon informed the Court that he received both 

doses of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in January 2021. (See id., PageID.709.) 

Case 2:15-cr-20146-MFL-MKM ECF No. 41, PageID.715 Filed 12/08/21 Page 1 of 2
2 

 Because Gordon has been fully vaccinated, the Court concludes that the risk 

of contracting COVID-19 while in custody does not constitute an extraordinary and 

compelling reason justifying his release. The United States Court of Appeals for the 

Sixth Circuit has repeatedly held in recent cases that “when [a prisoner] has access 

to the COVID-19 vaccine,” the prisoner’s potential exposure to the virus while in 

custody “does not present an extraordinary and compelling reason warranting” 

release. United States v. Lemons, 15 F.4th 747, 751 (6th Cir. 2021). See also United 

States v. Traylor, --- F.4th ---, 2021 WL 5045703, at *1 (6th Cir. Nov. 1, 2021) 

(holding district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied a motion for 

compassionate release based on prisoner’s underlying health conditions where 

defendant had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19). The Court is therefore not 

persuaded that Gordon is entitled to compassionate release at this time. 

 For all of the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 

Gordon’s motion for compassionate release (ECF No. 38) is DENIED. 

 s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: December 8, 2021 

 

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

parties and/or counsel of record on December 8, 2021, by electronic means and/or 

ordinary mail. 

 s/Holly A. Monda 

 Case Manager 

 (810) 341-9761 

Case 2:15-cr-20146-MFL-MKM ECF No. 41, PageID.716 Filed 12/08/21 Page 2 of 2
#### George Williams and another, *Appellants, v.*Harrison Gilmore, *Respondent.*

Judgment and order affirmed. Opinion by

Haight, J.
## Regional Haze - BA**RT Eligibility & Source Inv entory** 

**Three Hotels - Virgin Islands - From Title V Permits**

**Unit No. Source Type** **Capacity Heat Input**  **Fuel Date** **Potential To Emit (PTE), tons per year Meets BART Eligible Criteria?**  **Max Output, kW Max Load, %** **mmBTU/hr Type** **Constructed SO2**  **NOx PM10/PM** **VOC NH3** **Source Type 1962-1977 Date**  **PTE BART Eligible?**  (Note 3) **>250 TPY (Note 11)**  **The Buccaneer Hotel, Estate Shoys, St Croix** 1 Note 1 900 50 4.48 diesel ??? 10 max Note 2 ??/5.9 ??? ??? No ??? Yes No 2 Note 1 720 62 4.24 diesel ??? 9.5 max Note 2 ??/5.6 ??? ??? No ??? Yes No 3 Note 1 750 60 4.86 diesel ??? 10.8 max Note 2 ??/6.4 ??? ??? No ??? Yes No 4 Note 1 400 100 4.07 diesel ??? 9.1 max Note 2 ??/5.4 ??? ??? No ??? Yes No 5 Note 1 400 100 4.17 diesel ??? 9.3 max Note 2 ??/5.5 ??? ??? No ??? Yes No 6 Note 1 600 75 3.45 diesel ??? 7.7 max Note 2 ??/4.5 ??? ??? No ??? Yes No

**Divi Carina Bay Hotel, St Croix** 1 Note 8 1490 Note 9 ??? No. 2 Oil ??? 27.2 Note 10??/8.0 ??? ??? No ??? No No 2 Note 8 725 Note 9 ??? No. 2 Oil ??? 6.1 Note 10??/1.8 ??? ??? No ??? No No 3 Note 8 725 Note 9 ??? No. 2 Oil ??? 6.1 Note 10??/1.8 ??? ??? No ??? No No 4 Note 8 800 Note 9 ??? No. 2 Oil ??? 9.9 Note 10??/2.9 ??? ??? No ??? No No

**Wyndham Sugar Bay Beach Club and Resort, St Thomas** STT-630-A Note 5 900 71 9.7 No. 2 Oil ??? Note 6 Note 7 ??/9.2 ??? ??? No ??? No No STT-630-B Note 5 900 71 9.7 No. 2 Oil ??? Note 6 Note 7 ??/9.2 ??? ??? No ??? No No STT-630-CNote 5 900 71 9.7 No. 2 Oil ??? Note 6 Note 7 ??/9.2 ??? ??? No ??? No No

**Notes** (1) The six sources at the Buccaneer are Caterpillar and Onan Diesel Engines that generate electricity. (2) The Buccaneer facility has a permitted maximum NOx emission limit of 434.7 tons per year. (3) There is no applicable BART-eligible source category for the sources at the three hotels. (4) Each of the six sources at the Buccaneer Hotel has a permit limit for power output and fuel usage. The six engines have an annual total maximum fuel consumption of 545,341 gallons diesel fuel. (5) The three sources at the Wyndham resort are Caterpillar Engines that generate electricity. A max of 2 engines are permitted to operate at one time. Each engine has a rated capacity of 1,275 kWbut have a limited max load of 71% for 61 days, 47% for 122 days and 43% for 182 days. The three engines are permitted to burn not more than 887,069 gallons of No. 2 oil (containing 0.3% sulfur max) annually. (6) The Wyndham facility PTE for SO2 is calculated to be 19.0 TPY. (7) The Wyndham resort has a facility permitted NOx emission limit of 244.1 tons per year. (8) The four sources at the Divi Carina are diesel engine generator sets that generate electricity. (9) At the Divi Carina, permitted limits include: Unit 1 is run 24 hr/day, 365 day/yr; Units 2 and 3 run 24 hr/day on a 2-days on 8-day off rotation, 73 days/yr; Unit 4 runs 24 hr/day, 4-days on 6 days off rotation, 146 days/yr. (10) The Divi Carina has a facility permitted NOx emission limit of 236.7 tons per year.