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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6084

WILLIAM BERNARD RANDOLPH,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

GARY L. BASS; MAURICE MOIROT, Supervisor,

Augusta Correctional Center,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District

Judge. (CA-99-R)

Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 31, 1999

Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Bernard Randolph, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

William Bernard Randolph seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254

(West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on

the reasoning of the district court. See Randolph v. Bass, No. CA99-R (W.D. Va. Jan. 11, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 99-2450EM

_____________

Parveen Ahmed, *

 *

Appellant, * On Appeal from the United

 * States District Court

v. * for the Eastern District

 * of Missouri.

American Red Cross, *

 *

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: May 12, 2000

 Filed: July 31, 2000

___________

Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, HANSEN, and BYE, Circuit Judges. 

___________

RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Circuit Judge.

In March of 1997, the American Red Cross Missouri-Illinois Blood Services

Region discharged Dr. Parveen Ahmed. Dr. Ahmed claims that (1) the defendant

terminated her because of her race, religion, national origin, and gender, in violation of

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and 42 U.S.C.

§ 1981, and (2) the defendant retaliated against her for filing an earlier discrimination
1The Hon. Rodney W. Sippel, United States District Judge for the Eastern and

Western Districts of Missouri.

-2-

charge, in violation of Title VII. The District Court1 granted the defendant's motion for

summary judgment. We affirm. 

The plaintiff lost her job when the defendant underwent a reduction in force. As

is appropriate in a reduction-in-force case, in addition to the three normally required

elements of the Title VII or § 1981 prima facie case, the District Court required

plaintiff to demonstrate some additional evidence that race, national origin, religion, or

gender operated in her termination. Herrero v. St. Louis Hospital, 109 F.3d 481, 483-

84 (8th Cir. 1997). The District Court held that the plaintiff had not produced any such

evidence. We agree. Dr. Ahmed's evidence amounts to nothing more than a critique

of the defendant's business judgment in accomplishing its reduction in force. Although

she criticizes the decision-making process as ambiguous and unclear, she offers no

proof that the evaluation was influenced by prohibited criteria. 

We also agree with the District Court that Dr. Ahmed cannot demonstrate a

connection between her participation in a statutorily protected activity and an adverse

employment action. Dr. Ahmed filed an EEOC complaint in 1993, and she was

discharged in March of 1997. The extended time period between these two events, and

the fact that the supervisor who ultimately discharged Dr. Ahmed was not a Red Cross

employee when she made her initial EEOC complaint, suggests that the two events are

not related. In response, Dr. Ahmed has not offered any evidence by which a

reasonable trier of fact could conclude that there was a connection between the two

events. Accordingly, her retaliation claim fails. 

For these reasons, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed. 
-3-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### J. WARNER DUNPHEY, PLAINTIFF, v. JOSEPH L. WEINER, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS GARDEN STATE OIL COMPANY, DEFENDANT.

Decided December 13, 1928.

For the motion, *Jacob L. Furer.*

*Contra, Riggins & Davis.*

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Katzenbacji, J.

The plaintiff instituted a suit against Joseph L. Weiner, individually and trading as Garden State Oil Company, to recover upon a hook account. An answer was filed. The answer denied the indebtedness and that the same was due, and set up as a separate defense that any work done by the plaintiff for the defendant was done pursuant to contract. The plaintiff filed a reply. The plaintiff subsequently moved to strike out the answer as sham or frivolous. *14The motion was set down for September 11th, 1928. On that day it was postponed. Later in October the plaintiff was ready to argue the motion but counsel for the defendant were not present.

I am satisfied from the affidavits submitted by the plaintiff that there is no defense to this action. This is strengthened by the fact that no affidavits for the defendant have been filed notwithstanding the time given for that purpose. The difficulty which I have in following my inclination is due to an opinion in the case of *Great American Indemnity Co.*v. *Gronowicz et al.,*6 *N. J. Mis. R.*821. In this case it is pointed out that where the plaintiff has elected to reply, he cannot thereafter make a motion to strike out the defense. I am, therefore, obliged to deny the motion.
Exhibit 15.1





November16, 2009





American Medical Alert Corp.


Oceanside, New York





We have reviewed, in accordance with the standards of
the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the unaudited
interim financial information of American
Medical Alert Corp. and Subsidiaries for the fiscal periods endedSeptember30, 2009andSeptember30, 2008, as indicated in
our report datedNovember16, 2009.  Because we did not perform an audit, we
expressed no opinion on that information.





Weare aware that
our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarter endedSeptember30, 2009, is incorporated
by reference in the following Registration Statements:





·
            Registration Statement No. 33-48385 on Form
      S-8;


·
            Registration Statement No. 33-91806 on Form
      S-8;


·
            Registration Statement No. 333-53029 on
      Form S-8;


·
            Registration Statement No. 333-70626 on
      Form S-8;


·
            Registration Statement No. 333-130811 on
      Form S-8;
  and


·
            Registration Statement No. 333-88192 on
      Form S-3.





We also are aware that the aforementioned report,
pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, is not
considered a part of the Registration Statements prepared or
certified by an accountant or a report
prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11
of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.





/s/
Margolin, Winer & Evens LLP





Margolin, Winer & Evens LLP


Garden City, New York
EXHIBIT

ITEM 10(ii)A(6)

** **

Amendment to the Life InsuranceEndorsement Method Split Dollar Plan Agreement Dated

January 6, 2000

 

----

 

**AMENDMENT**

TO THE LIFE INSURANCE ENDORSEMENT

METHOD SPLIT DOLLAR PLAN AGREEMENT

DATED JANUARY 6, 2000

 

This Amendment, made and entered into this 16th****dayof  August, 2001 by and between Monterey County Bank, a Bankorganized and existing under the laws of the State of California, hereinafterreferred to as the, “Bank”, and Charles T. Chrietzberg, Jr., a Key Employee andExecutive of the Bank, hereinafter referred to as the, “Executive”, shalleffectively amend the Life Insurance Endorsement Method Split Dollar PlanAgreement dated January 6, 2000 as specifically set forth herein. Saidagreement shall be amended as follows:

 

1.) The following life insurance policy information shall be added topage one (1) of the agreement:

 

Insurer:                  AlexanderHamilton Life Insurance Company

 

Policy Number:     0008658250

 

This Amendment shall be effective on the 16th day ofAugust, 2001. To the extent that any paragraph, term, or provision ofthe January 6, 2000 agreement is not specifically amended herein, or in anyother amendment thereto, said paragraph, term, or provision shall remain infull force and effect as set forth in said agreement.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto acknowledgethat each has carefully read this Amendment and executed the original thereofon the first day set forth hereinabove and that, upon execution, each hasreceived a conforming copy.

 
|                  | MONTEREY COUNTY BANK         |
|-----------------------|------------------------------|
|                  | Monterey,  California        |
|  /s/ Dorina Chan |                         | By: |  /s/ Bruce N. Warner, Sr. V. P. |   |
| Witness               |                         | Title |   |
|  /s/ Dorina Chan |                         | /s/ Charles  T. Chrietzberg, Jr. |   |
| Witness               | Charles T.  Chrietzberg, Jr. |
|                       |                              |  |  |  |  |  |

 

1

----
Consent of Independent Accountants

We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the registration  statements of
V-ONE  Corporation  on Form S-3  (Registration  Nos.  333-69047,  333-67625  and
333-43795)  and  on  Form  S-8  (Registration  Nos.  333-61909,   333-52909  and
333-17749) of our report dated March 11, 1999,  except as to Note 14 which is as
of  March  31,  1999,  on  our  audits  of the  financial  statements  of  V-ONE
Corporation  as of  December  31,  1997 and 1998 and for the three  years in the
period ended December 31, 1998, which report is included in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K.


                                                /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP





McLean, VA
March 31, 1999
Order entered July 15, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00859-CV

THERESA BARNETT, Appellant

V.

DAVID S. CROCKETT, ET AL., Appellee

On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 10-00136

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s July 13, 2014 emergency motion to suspend enforcement 

of judgment pending appeal in which appellant requests an emergency order suspending 

enforcement of the trial court’s July 29, 2013 sanctions order and June 19, 2014 judgment, which 

incorporates the sanctions order.

We DENY appellant’s motion for an emergency order suspending enforcement of the 

trial court’s July 29, 2013 sanctions order and the June 19, 2014 judgment. We further ORDER

the trial court to transmit a supplemental clerk’s record containing its written findings of fact and 

conclusions of law to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order. 
This Court will DEFER ruling on the adequacy of the bond in this case pending receipt 

of the record of the proceedings determining the amount of bond, deposit or security required in 

this case, the appellant’s net worth, and the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, 

stating with particularity the factual basis for the determination of appellant’s net worth. The 

parties may file letter briefs of no more than three pages addressing the adequacy of the bond, 

deposit or security required in the case within ten days of the filing of the supplemental clerk’s 

record transmitting the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. 

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order by electronic transmission to all 

parties and to the Honorable Tonya Parker, Presiding Judge of the 116th Judicial District Court, 

Dallas County, Texas. 

We ABATE the appeal to allow the trial court to comply with this order.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 99.12

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 Cameco Corporation (the Company) on Form 40-F for
the year ended December 31, 2016, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Grant Isaac, Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



|1. | 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |     |  |                 |  |                          
| |  | --- |  | --------------- |  | -------------------------
| |  | By: |  | /s/ Grant Isaac
| |  |     |  | Name:           |  | Grant Isaac              
| |  |     |  | Title:          |  | Senior Vice-President and
| |  |     |  |                 |  | Chief Financial Officer  

March 23, 2017
§ 185.726 Annual inspections. ( a ) Each rescue boat must be stripped, cleaned, and thoroughly inspected, and any necessary repairs made at least once each year, including emptying and cleaning of each fuel tank, and refilling it with fresh fuel.
( b ) Each davit, winch, fall and other launching appliance must be thoroughly inspected, and any necessary repairs made, at least once each year.
( c ) Each item of lifesaving equipment with an expiration date must be replaced during the annual inspection and repair if the expiration date has passed.
( d ) Each battery used in an item of lifesaving equipment, except inflatable survival craft equipment, must be replaced during the annual inspection if the expiration date of the battery has passed. The expiration date of the battery may be marked on the battery or the owner or managing operator may have a record of the expiration date from the manufacturer of a battery marked with a serial number.
( e ) Except for a storage battery used in a rescue boat, each battery without an expiration date indicated on it or for which the owner or managing operator does not have a record of the expiration date, used in an item of lifesaving equipment, must be replaced during the annual inspection.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> BD
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          25,528
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,533
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                             13,117
<PP&E>                                           2,441
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  95,695
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<PAYABLES>                                       8,539
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                  99
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           152
<OTHER-SE>                                      86,573
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    95,695
<TRADING-REVENUE>                                  607
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                               615
<COMMISSIONS>                                    5,591
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                    3,973
<FEE-REVENUE>                                    1,424
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<COMPENSATION>                                   7,408
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,184
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         634
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       634
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>     0000826745
<NAME>    First Capital Growth Fund--XIV a Real Estate Limited Partnership
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                         Jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                           Dec-31-1996
<CASH>                                   1,986,300
<SECURITIES>                               496,300
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0         
<INVENTORY>                                      0    
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         2,487,100   
<PP&E>                                   7,161,200
<DEPRECIATION>                           1,238,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           8,426,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      774,600    
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0 
<PREFERRED>                                      0 
<COMMON>                                         0 
<OTHER-SE>                               7,617,500       
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             8,426,500 
<SALES>                                          0  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         1,654,200          
<CGS>                                            0  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              903,400          
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            71,400 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0          
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0           
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            428,900  
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0          
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        428,900
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0      
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0          
<CHANGES>                                        0      
<NET-INCOME>                               428,900
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 2.66
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 2.66
        
                                  

</TABLE>
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)  Board Actions | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco

#   Board Actions 

## Actions taken during the week ending November 17, 2007 

----

None 
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)  Board Actions | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco
Home | Banking information and regulationAccessibility | Contact   usLast update: November 23, 2007
EXHIBIT 99.18

CONSENT OF EXPERT

Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F
(the Form 40-F) of Cameco Corporation (the Corporation) to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

I hereby consent to reference to my name and my involvement in the preparation of, or supervision of the preparation of, scientific and
technical information in the following instances:



| | (a) | under the headings Operations and Development Projects  Uranium Development Project  Cigar Lake, Mineral Reserves and Resources and
Governance  Interest of Experts in the Corporations Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2012 dated February 22, 2013 for the Cigar Lake property; and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | under the headings  Our Operations and Development Projects  Uranium Development Project  Cigar Lake and Mineral Reserves and
Resources in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation for the year ended December 31, 2012 dated February 11, 2013 for the Cigar Lake property,
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(collectively the Technical Information) in the Form 40-F, and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of information derived from
the Technical Information in the Form 40-F.

I also hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of such Technical
Information in the registration statements (Nos. 333-11736, 333-6180 and 333-139165) on Form S-8 for the Cameco Corporation Stock Option Plan, registration statement (No. 333-139324) on Form S-8 for the Cameco Corporation Employee Share Ownership
Plan and registration statement (No.333-181577) on Form F-10.

Sincerely,



|                    |  |                                                                              
|------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ C. Scott Bishop
|Name:               |  | C. Scott Bishop, P. Eng.                                                     
|Title:              |  | Principal Mine Engineer, Cameco Technology and Innovation, Cameco Corporation
|                    | 
|Date:               |  | February 22, 2013
89–008

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 107–80

WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII

WITH RESPECT TO THE SAME DAY CONSIDERATION OF

CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE

MAY 24, 2001.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. REYNOLDS, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. Res. 149]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 149, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a twothirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from

the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions reported from the

Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver to any special rule

reported on the legislative day of May 25, 2001, providing for consideration or disposition of any measure to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 104 of the concurrent resolution on the

budget for fiscal year 2002, any amendment thereto, any conference

report thereon, or any amendment reported in disagreement from

a conference thereon.

Æ