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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-7309

ANTONIO M. WALLER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CATHERINE PAGE, Psychiatrist, Red Onion State

Prison; P. RASNICK, Nurse; LIEUTENANT YOUNCE;

SERGEANT FLANARY; SERGEANT FOWLER; THOMPSON,

Prison Guard,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

FRED SCHILLING, Director of Health Services;

CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; JOHN DOE,

Defendants.

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

Judge. (CA-99-762-7)

Submitted: April 12, 2001 Decided: April 17, 2001

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Antonio M. Waller, Appellant Pro Se. David Ernest Boelzner,

Heather Marie Kofron, WRIGHT, ROBINSON, OSTHIMER & TATUM, Richmond,

Virginia; Mark Ralph Davis, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Antonio M. Waller appeals the district court’s order granting

summary judgment to some of the Defendants in his 42 U.S.C.A.

§ 1983 (West Supp. 2000) action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may

exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291

(1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.

§ 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus.

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is

neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral

order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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
### SERVED: September 19, 2016 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

.· .... ···."; •.

In The Matter Of: BEM SYSTEMS, INC. Respondent 

### OFFICE OF HEARINGS · WASHINGTON, DC**·~:** J\
. ...**~i** _, '·y .li: DocketNo. FAA-2016-4264 ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2015NM730029

NOTICE OF HEARING Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.205(a)(l) and§ 13.221, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Location a. The hearing will be held in courtroom number one at the Martin Luther King Building & U.S. Courthouse, 50 Walnut Street, Newark, NJ 07102. b. Briefcases, purses, packages, and other items will be subject to search upon entry to the building. All individuals must present a valid**government~issued** I.D. to enter. 2. Date a. The hearing will begin onFebruary 28, 2017. b. The courtroom is reserved through March 1, 2017. 3. Time a. The hearing will begin at 9:00 a.m. local time and end by 4:00 p.m. each day. b. The parties shall vacate the courthouse by 5:00 p.m. each day.

# ~~--- DOUGLAS M. RAW ALD Administrative Law Judge
Attachment: Service ListSERVICE LIST - BYU.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl0001

BEM Systems, Inc., Respondent ATTN: MarkMurset, CFO 100 Passaic Avenue Chatham, NJ 07928 Glenn H. Brown, Complainant's Counsel EnforcementDivision, Western Team Federal AviationAdministration 222 West 7thAvenue Box 14 Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 TEL: 907-271-5271 FAX: 907-271-2800 ONE COPY

The Honorable Douglas M. Rawald,Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 · U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (El 1-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2016-4264 (Civil Penalty Action)

1Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23-1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-57640 and 333-84446), on Form S-4 (File
No. 333-37082) and on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-61390 and 333-49780) of Exelon
Corporation and Subsidiary Companies of our report dated January 29, 2002,
except for Note 25 for which the date is March 1, 2002, relating to the
financial statements, which appears in the Annual Report to Shareholders, which
in incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent
to the incorporation by reference of our report dated January 29, 2002 relating
to the financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chicago, Illinois
April 1, 2002
§ 605.15 Content of agreement. ( a ) Every grantee who is not authorized by the Administrator under § 605.11 of this part to engage in school bus operations shall, as a condition of assistance, enter into a written agreement required by § 605.14 which shall contain the following provisions: ( 1 ) The grantee and any operator of project equipment agrees that it will not engage in school bus operations in competition with private school bus operators.
( 2 ) The grantee agrees that it will not engage in any practice which constitutes a means of avoiding the requirements of this agreement, part 605 of the Federal Mass Transit Regulations, or section 164(b) of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (49 U.S.C. 1602a(b)).
( b ) Every grantee who obtains authorization from the Administrator to engage in school bus operations under § 605.11 of this part shall, as a condition of assistance, enter into a written agreement required by § 605.14 of this part which contains the following provisions: ( 1 ) The grantee agrees that neither it nor any operator of project equipment will engage in school bus operations in competition with private school bus operators except as provided herein.
( 2 ) The grantee, or any operator of project equipment, agrees to promptly notify the Administrator of any changes in its operations which might jeopardize the continuation of an exemption under § 605.11.
( 3 ) The grantee agrees that it will not engage in any practice which constitutes a means of avoiding the requirements of this agreement, part 605 of the Federal Transit Administration regulations or section 164(b) of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (49 U.S.C. 1602a(b)).
( 4 ) The grantee agrees that the project facilities and equipment shall be used for the provision of mass transportation services within its urban area and that any other use of project facilities and equipment will be incidental to and shall not interfere with the use of such facilities and equipment in mass transportation service to the public.
<TABLE> <S> <C>




  <ARTICLE> 5
  <LEGEND>
  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM
  10-KSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
  STATEMENTS.
  </LEGEND>
  <CIK> 0000021828
  <NAME> COLONIAL COMMERCIAL CORP.
         
 <S>                                                            <C>
 <PERIOD-TYPE>                                                 YEAR
 <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                             DEC-31-1998
 <PERIOD-END>                                                  DEC-31-1998
 <CASH>                                                          5,001,881
 <SECURITIES>                                                            0
 <RECEIVABLES>                                                   9,239,201
 <ALLOWANCES>                                                      667,500
 <INVENTORY>                                                     1,177,907
 <CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               15,171,132
 <PP&E>                                                            746,101
 <DEPRECIATION>                                                    243,789
 <TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 16,325,313
 <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                           4,753,754
 <BONDS>                                                                 0
 <COMMON>                                                           73,153
 <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                   0
 <PREFERRED>                                                        79,650
 <OTHER-SE>                                                     10,654,287
 <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   16,325,313
 <SALES>                                                        25,233,909
 <TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               25,233,909
 <CGS>                                                          18,557,769
 <TOTAL-COSTS>                                                  18,557,769
 <OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                        0
 <LOSS-PROVISION>                                                  223,000
 <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                200,283
 <INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 3,931,105
 <INCOME-TAX>                                                       79,352
 <INCOME-CONTINUING>                                             3,851,753
 <DISCONTINUED>                                                          0
 <EXTRAORDINARY>                                                         0
 <CHANGES>                                                               0
 <NET-INCOME>                                                    3,851,753
 <EPS-PRIMARY>                                                        2.66
 <EPS-DILUTED>                                                        1.23
         


</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1





                    INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT




        We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on (Form S-8 No. 33-42543 dated August 30, 1991) pertaining to
the Cognitronics Corporation 1967 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the
Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 33-42544 dated August 30, 1991
and Form S-8 No. 333-05897 dated June 13, 1996) pertaining to the
Cognitronics Corporation 1990 Stock Option Plan and the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-05899 dated June 13, 1996) pertaining to
the Cognitronics Corporation Restricted Stock Plan of our report dated
March 3, 2004, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
Cognitronics Corporation, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for
the year ended December 31, 2003.




                                      /s/ Carlin, Charron & Rosen, LLP

Glastonbury, Connecticut
March 29, 2004
EXHIBIT 32.1


                            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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Heritage Worldwide,
Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of
the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350:

         (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.


Date:  November 16, 2004                            /s/ Alain Sereyjol-Garros
                                                     -------------------------
                                                        Alain Sereyjol-Garros
                                                       Chief Executive Officer
§ 33.32 Elements of a rated order. Each rated order must include: ( a ) The appropriate priority rating (*e.g.* DO-T1 or DX-T1);
( b ) A required delivery date or dates. The words “immediately” or “as soon as possible” do not constitute a delivery date. A “requirements contract,” “basic ordering agreement,” “prime vendor contract,” or similar procurement document bearing a priority rating may contain no specific delivery date or dates and may provide for the furnishing of items or service from time-to-time or within a stated period against specific purchase orders, such as “calls,” “requisitions,” and “delivery orders.” These purchase orders must specify a required delivery date or dates and are to be considered as rated as of the date of their receipt by the supplier and not as of the date of the original procurement document;
( c ) The written signature on a manually placed order, or the digital signature or name on an electronically placed order, of an individual authorized to sign rated orders for the person placing the order. The signature or use of the name certifies that the rated order is authorized under this part and that the requirements of this part are being followed; and
( d ) ( 1 ) A statement that reads in substance: This is a rated order certified for national defense use, and you are required to follow all the provisions of the Transportation Priorities and Allocations System regulation at 49 CFR Part 33.
( 2 ) If the rated order is placed in support of emergency preparedness requirements and expedited action is necessary and appropriate to meet these requirements, the following sentences should be added following the statement set forth in paragraph (d)(1) above:
This rated order is placed for the purpose of emergency preparedness. It must be accepted or rejected within *[INSERT NUMBER OF HOURS REQUIRED IN § 33.33 ]* hours from receipt of the order, in accordance with § 33.33(e) of the Transportation Priorities and Allocations System regulation at 49 CFR Part 33.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 362 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 362

Congratulating the 2002 United States Olympic Team, Salt Lake City, the 
 State of Utah, the Salt Lake Organizing Committee, the International 
Olympic Committee, athletes from around the world, and all the security 
  personnel who participated in the 2002 Olympic Winter Games in Salt 
                            Lake City, Utah.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2002

 Mr. Hastings of Florida submitted the following resolution; which was 
          referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Congratulating the 2002 United States Olympic Team, Salt Lake City, the 
 State of Utah, the Salt Lake Organizing Committee, the International 
Olympic Committee, athletes from around the world, and all the security 
  personnel who participated in the 2002 Olympic Winter Games in Salt 
                            Lake City, Utah.

Whereas the 2002 Olympic Winter Games in Salt Lake City, Utah, were successfully 
        completed;
Whereas athletes from the United States and thousands from all over the world 
        came together and took part in the Olympics in the best spirit of good 
        sportsmanship;
Whereas the United States Olympic Team, as a result of immense dedication and 
        personal sacrifice, excelled at their respective sports and won a record 
        number of Winter Olympics medals;
Whereas African-American and Mexican-American athletes won medals for the first 
        time in the Winter Olympics history;
Whereas the 60 security organizations entrusted with the responsibility of 
        protecting the athletes, coaches, judges, and spectators rose to the 
        challenge to provide the safest Olympic Games ever and set an impressive 
        precedent for providing security in the future;
Whereas athletes and fans from around the world supported these Olympic Games in 
        record numbers; and
Whereas the 2002 Olympic Winter Games accomplished the principles set forth by 
        the Olympic movement, including the aim to ``encourage the Olympic 
        spirit of peace and harmony, which brings the people from across the 
        world together around Olympic sport'': Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That the House of Representatives extends its heartiest 
congratulations to the members of the 2002 United States Olympic Team, 
its coaches, and officials for a job well done, and congratulates Salt 
Lake City, the State of Utah, the Salt Lake Organizing Committee, the 
International Olympic Committee, athletes from around the world, the 
various security agencies, and the people of the Salt Lake City area 
for their immensely successful efforts in organizing and carrying out 
the 2002 Olympic Winter Games.
                                 <all>
```
# Nov. 21: Military Airstrikes Continue Against ISIL in Syria and Iraq

/ Published Nov. 21, 2014

	November 21, 2014RELEASE #20141115

	FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

**TAMPA, Fla., Nov. 21, 2014** — Military airstrikes continue against ISIL in Syria and Iraq. U.S. and partner nation military forces continued to attack ISIL terrorists in Syria Nov. 19-21 using fighter and bomber aircraft to conduct seven airstrikes. Separately, U.S. and partner nation military forces conducted 23 airstrikes in Iraq Nov. 19-21 using fighter, attack, bomber and remotely-piloted aircraft against ISIL terrorists.

	In Syria, six airstrikes near Kobani destroyed four ISIL staging areas, two ISIL-occupied buildings, two ISIL tactical units, and suppressed an ISIL fighting position. Near Ar Raqqah, an airstrike damaged an ISIL barrack.

	In Iraq, six airstrikes near Bayji destroyed three ISIL buildings, a bunker, two ISIL transport vehicles, five ISIL tactical units, an ISIL checkpoint and damaged another ISIL building. Near Sinjar, four airstrikes destroyed two ISIL barracks, an ISIL bunker and storage facility, an ISIL guard post, at least eight ISIL armored vehicles and a truck in a vehicle storage yard, as well as two tactical ISIL units. West of Kirkuk, three airstrikes destroyed five bunkers, two ISIL vehicles and an ISIL tactical unit. Near al Asad, four airstrikes destroyed four ISIL vehicles, an ISIL building, and struck three ISIL tactical units. Near Mosul, three airstrikes destroyed an ISIL guard post, an ISIL vehicle and two ISIL tactical units. Near Ramadi, two airstrikes destroyed an ISIL vehicle and an ISIL tactical unit, while also damaging an ISIL armored vehicle and an ISIL-occupied building. Finally, in Tal Afar, an airstrike damaged an ISIL-occupied airfield.

	All aircraft returned to base safely. Airstrike assessments are based on initial reports.

	The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the terrorist group ISIL and the threat they pose to Iraq, the region and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project power and conduct operations. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Iraq include the U.S., Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Coalition Nations conducting airstrikes in Syria include the U.S., Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.
###### Editorial Note on Part 393

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 393 appear at 66 FR 49874, Oct. 1, 2001.

#### § 393.27 [Reserved]
#### Simon Heilbrunn, Respondent, *v.*German Alliance Insurance Company of New York, Appellant.

*Heilbrunn*v. *German Alliance Ins. Co.,*140 App. Div. 557, affirmed.

(Argued April 24, 1911;

decided June 16, 1911.)

Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 4, 1910, which reversed an order of Special Term sustaining a demurrer to the complaint and overruled said demurrer.

*611The following question was certified: “Does the amended complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action? ”

*Alton B. Parker*and *Leo Levy*for appellant.

*Jacob P. Schiff*and *Isidore D. Morrison*for respondent.

Collin, J.

The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion of. Scott, J., below. *(Heilbrunn*v. *German Alliance Ins. Co.,*140 App. Div. 557)

We admit that insurance companies ought to have more protection in the matter of the time within which actions upon their policies must be brought, and possibly in other respects, than has been afforded them under the decision of the Appellate Division in this case; but the difficulty is that the language of those stipulations or conditions of the policy which relate to the proceedings after the liability of the company has accrued through the fire, does not enable or permit us to apply them to the mortgagee in such part only as may be practicable or expedient. We must hold (unless our decision is to be wholly arbitrary) that all those stipulations, which in terms relate to the mortgagor only, apply equally to the mortgagor and mortgagee, or we must hold that none of them do. The former dictates that which is impossible of performance. The remedy of the companies is to apply to the legislature for leave to modify, as to the matters indicated, the standard fire insurance policy of the state of New York.

On the merits we concur with the opinion of Scott, J., below.

The order of the Appellate Division in this case should, therefore, be affirmed, with costs, and the question certified answered in the affirmative.

Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner and Hiscocic, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 249 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                       October 2, 2001.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are hereby, elected to 
the following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on the Judiciary: Mr. Bryant to rank after Mr. Goodlatte and Mr. 
Pence.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Order entered March 4, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 12
- 00705
- CV CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant
V. BRIAN LONCAR, SUE LO NCAR, ET AL . , Appellee s On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Tri al Court Cause No. CC
- 09
- 06753
- C 

### O RDER The Court has before it appellant’s February 28, 2013 unopposed motion for extension of time to file reply brief. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that any reply brief be filed by April 8, 2013.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE