alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 01-10404 Summary Calendar

DIANE MANNEY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

MARITZ TRAVEL COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas

(3:00-CV-28-H)

November 20, 2001
Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Diane Manney (“Manney”) sued her former employer, Maritz

Travel Company (“Maritz”), alleging a violat ion of the Age

Discrimination and Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621, et seq. Maritz

answered that Manney’s position had been eliminated in November

1998 as part of a reduction in force and change of focus for the2

company business. Maritz moved for summary judgment based on

Manney’s failure to adduce sufficient evidence of pr etext. The

district court carefully considered the plead ings, the summary

judgment motion, and the summary judgment evidence and concluded in

oral findings dated February 23, 2001 , that there was not

sufficient eviden ce upon which a reasonable jury could find that

the non-discrim inatory reason offered by Maritz for Manney’s

termination was a pretext for age discrimination. The district

court granted summary judgment in favor of Mari tz and Manney

appeals to this Court.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the repl y brief, the

record excerpts, and relevant portions of the record itself. For

the reasons stated by the district court in its oral findings dated

February 23, 2001, the decision of the district court to grant

summary judgment in favor of Maritz will be affirmed.

AFFIRMED

.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">	<br>In the Matter of Winston Gregory Hall, for leave to assume the name of Sage-El, Petitioner-Appellant.<br></font></b></div><br><p>ย </p><p>Petitioner appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Carol R. Sharpe, J.), entered August 28, 2017, after a hearing, which denied his request to change his race/nationality in a proceeding pursuant to article 6 of the Civil Rights Law.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Appeal from order (Carol R. Sharpe, J.), entered August 28, 2017, deemed an application by petitioner for review pursuant to CPLR 5704(b), and so considered, order affirmed.</p><p>Upon the grant of petitioner's application to change his name (<i>see</i> Civil Rights Law ยง 63), Civil Court properly denied the additional relief sought by petitioner with respect to his race and nationality. Such relief is not authorized by article 6 of the Civil Rights Law and is beyond the scope of Civil Court's limited jurisdiction (<i>see</i> CCA 201 <i>et seq.</i>).</p><p>Although petitioner has appealed from an ex parte order which is not appealable as of right (<i>see </i>CPLR 5701[1], [2]), we treat the appeal as an application by petitioner for review pursuant to CPLR 5704(b) (<i>see Matter of Washington</i>, 216 AD2d 781, 781 [1995]).</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concurDecision Date: February 22, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
p. 1 

# OAR Box 1147 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 198 ) IV-E-7 2 Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Printed 4/22/20082:42:57

PM Sheet 198of 242r

\ ^

0SU % 

# Mss y P. 2 

### fl-Qlr- I

| UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 

### OC TT198 8 OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N MEMORANDU

M SUBJECT : Visi t t o Chrysle r FROM : F . Pete r Hutchins , Mechanica l Enginee r >

Standard s Developmen t an d Suppor t Bran e TO : The Record
In respons e t o a reques t b yChrysler , EP

Apersonne l visite d Chrysler' s emissio n tes t facilit yin Highlan d Park o n Septembe r 1 5 t o se e Chrysler' s recentl yinstalle d refueling emissio n tes t equipment . EP Apersonnel , visiting Chrysle r wer e Joh n Polasek , Car l Fulle r an d Pete r Hutchins . Chrysle r personne l showing the equipmen t wer e Ji mFurlong , Gar yDawson , Alle n Whit e an

d Arnol d Weibel . The tes t facilitie s show n consiste d o f a newSHED , fueling car t (dispense d fue l temperatur e an d dispensing rat e ar e controlle d i n the car t - fue l i s no t store d i n the cart) , fue l drai n car t an

d separat e contro l room . The ne wfacilitie s ar e locate d i n a roo

mwhic hwa s constructe d insid e o f a n existing building . Al l electrica l equipmen t no t located in th e contro l roo mi s constructe d o f explosion-proo f components . The contro l roo m contain s the emissio n analyzer s an d a compute r programme d t o contro l al l function s o f a tes t onc e th e tes t vehicl e i s i n the SHE D an

d the fue l nozzl e ha s bee n inserte d in the fille r neck . Multipl e sampl e collectio n probe s ar e availabl e t o facilitat e emissio n sourc e identification . Chrysle r chos e a n in-SHE D fue l hos e an d nozzl e design s o a s t o accommodat e a wid e rang e o f vehicl e fillnec k locations . The fue l suppl yhose , recirculatio n hose , ai r suppl yfor nozzl e activation , an d thermocopl e wiring ar e enclose d i n larg e flexibl e hose . The inten t o f th

e enclosing hos e i s t o tra p an yhydrocarbon s

, ,-AO- A ' ..wi'A
- \ r

~ '-:•>P. 3

•? *"" ' escapin g fro mth e fue l hose s and/o r th e nozzl e i n th e exterio r hos e an d t o allo wpurgin g b ya strea mo f air . Chrysle r i s presentl ydebuggin g th e system . Chrysle r report s tha t th e facilit ywa s ordere d approximatel y1 4 month s ago . Th e reporte d cos t i s jus t unde r $600,000 . Th e facilit yappear s t o b e ver ywel l suite d fo r bot hth e developmen t o f onboar d system s and fo r th e routin e collectio n o f onboar d refuelin g emission s data . EP Apersonne l reminde d Chrysle r personne l o f problem s experience d b yEP Ai n th e area s o f fue l hos e permeabilit yand fue l leak s a t th e nozzl e whe n EP A ha d use d a n in-SHE D nozzl e and hoses . Chrysler' s us e o f a n enclosin g hos e wit hai r purg e ma yresolv e th e problem s o f SHE D contaminatio n experience d b yEPA .

6391 W
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRED GRAVES,

Petitioner, No. CIV S 04-1279 LKK GGH P

vs.

MIKE KNOWLES, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely filed a notice of appeal of

this court's January 12, 2006, denial of his application for a writ of habeas corpus. Before

petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c);

Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

A certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 “only if the

applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2). The certificate of appealability must “indicate which specific issue or issues

satisfy” the requirement. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3).

A certificate of appealability should be granted for any issue that petitioner can

demonstrate is “‘debatable among jurists of reason,’” could be resolved differently by a different

court, or is “‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.’” Jennings v. Woodford,

Case 2:04-cv-01279-LKK -GGH Document 37 Filed 03/13/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

 Except for the requirement that appealable issues be specifically identified, the standard

for issuance of a certificate of appealability is the same as the standard that applied to issuance of

a certificate of probable cause. Jennings, at 1010.

2

290 F.3d 1006, 1010 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983)).1

Petitioner has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right in

the following issues presented in the instant petition: 1) denial of witnesses; 2) biased hearing

officer; 3) denial of non-confidential reports and evidence; 4) insufficient evidence; 5) Miranda

violation; 6) denial of appeal; 7) illegal SHU term; 8) inadequate investigative officer; 9)

evidence tampering. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is

issued in the present action.

DATED: March 10, 2006.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01279-LKK -GGH Document 37 Filed 03/13/06 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Christopher J. Willi,certify that:

 

1.        I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sherwood Brands, Inc. (the “Registrant”);

 

2.        Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.        Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4.        The Registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have:

 

(a)      designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)     evaluated the effectivenessof the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation;

 

(c)      disclosed in this report anychange in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.        The Registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent function):

 

(a)      all significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theRegistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and

 

(b)     any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

----

 
| Date: June 11, 2004 |
|---------------------|
|                |
|                |
|                | /s/ Christopher J. Willi |
|                | Christopher J. Willi |
|                | Chief Financial Officer and  Secretary |

 

----
21.04
Order entered August 22, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 12
- 01162
- CR
JOHANAN JOHN FOLSOM , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial C ourt Cause No. F11
- 58786
- P



### O RDER On July 11, 2013, this Court reversed appellant’s conviction and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings. On July 31, 2013, appellant filed a “ Motion to Expedite
Mandate. ” T here has been no response from the State to this motion.
A ppellant ’ s motion to expedite mandate is GRANTED . It is hereby ORDERED that the
mandate in the above

- styled case issue.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
----

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 7 September 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Genova — Italy) — Cristiano Marrosu, Gianluca Sardino v Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedale San Martino di Genova e Cliniche Universitarie Convenzionate

(Case C-53/04) (1)

(Directive 1999/70/EC - Clauses 1(b) and 5 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work - Establishment of employment relationships of indefinite duration resulting from infringement of the rules governing successive fixed-term contracts - Possible derogation in respect of employment contracts in the public sector)

(2006/C 281/01)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Genova

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Cristiano Marrosu, Gianluca Sardino

Defendant: Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedale San Martino di Genova e Cliniche Universitarie Convenzionate

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Genova — Interpretation of Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43) — Establishment of an employment relationship of indefinite duration in the case where the rules governing successive fixed-term contracts have been infringed — Possibility of derogation in the case of employment contracts signed with public authorities

Operative part of the judgment

The framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded on 18 March 1999, which is annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as not in principle precluding national legislation which, where there is abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term employment contracts or relationships by a public-sector employer, precludes their being converted into contracts of indeterminate duration, even though such conversion is provided for in respect of employment contracts and relationships with a private-sector employer, where that legislation includes another effective measure to prevent and, where relevant, punish the abuse of successive fixed-term contracts by a public-sector employer.

----

(1)OJ C 85, 3.4.2004.

----
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERTO A. OLIVAS,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-1306 DFL CMK P

vs.

DARREL ADAMS, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

This petition for writ of habeas corpus was dismissed on September 15, 2005. 

Documents filed by petitioner since the closing date will be disregarded and no orders will issue

in response to future filings.

DATED: October 5, 2005.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01306-DFL-CMK Document 24 Filed 10/06/05 Page 1 of 1
February 5, 2015 

Mr. Todd Homan 

Director, Office of Aviation Analysis 

US Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Mr. Homan, 

"; 

.,; l 

.·-;.' 

. . . : l 

Whaler's Cove Lodge is near the Community of Angoon, Alaska. We are the largest employer for 

the town and rely heavily upon the services of Alaska Seaplane. Our lodge is remotely situated on 

a Killisnoo Island, off of Admiralty Island, with no connections to the mainland road network, and 

with limited ferry service. 

Scheduled daily air service operated by Alaska Seaplanes provides a critical link to: 

• Juneau for connections to the larger air transportation network for our crew and some of 

our guests 

• Critical Access to healthcare for our staff of 26 crew who live on-site at the lodge all 

summer, and for major medical emergency services for our guests 

• Supplies, especially those needed last minute for our operations (like engine parts for our 

vessels!) 

• Post Office - all of our business mail is delivered to the Post Office by AK Seaplanes 

We have always felt safe flying with the AK Seaplanes bush pilots. This is our main form of 

transportation to both our private home, just outside of Angoon, and our family business, which 

will be operating for its 33rd season this summer. 

As an owner of Whaler's Cove Lodge, I strongly support Alaska Seaplanes' proposal for a new 

four-year term to serve Angoon under the USDoT Essential Air Service program. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Sincerely, 

Kristine Powers 

Whaler's Cove Lodge 

PO Box 101 

Angoon, AK 99820 

. '
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

ROBERT A. BELLAGAMBA, ESQ. BAR#: 56537

J. KEVIN MOORE, ESQ. BAR#: 153744

CLAPP, MORONEY, BELLAGAMBA and VUCINICH

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

6140 Stoneridge Mall Road, Suite 545

Pleasanton, CA 94588

(925) 734-0990 Fax: (925) 734-0888

Attorneys for CROSS-DEFENDANTS

KOVACH, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE:

SUNTERRA CORPORATION,

Debtor,

SUNTERRA CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

PERINI BUILDING COMPANY,

Defendant.

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS

No. CIV-S-04-0784 MCE/PAN

ORDER RE SUBSTITUTION OF

ATTORNEY FOR KOVACH, INC.

On proof made to the satisfaction of the Court that proper

notice has been given pursuant to Local Rule 83-182 and consent to

the above substitution having been made by Kovach, Inc. and its

prior counsel, the application for substitution of attorney of

Kovach, Inc. ought to be granted.

///

///

Case 2:04-cv-00784-MCE -EFB Document 49 Filed 08/10/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

IT IS SO ORDERED that J. Kevin Moore, State Bar No.: 153744, of

Clapp, Moroney, Bellagamba, Vucinich, 6140 Stoneridge Mall Road,

Suite 545, Pleasanton, CA 94588, Tel: 925-735-0990, Fax: 925-734-

0888 be substituted as attorney of record for Kovach, Inc. in the

place and stead of Anne E. Connelly, State Bar No.: 165753, of

VITALE & LOWE, 3249 Quality Drive, Ste. 110, Rancho Cordova, CA

95670-6098, Tel: 916-851-3750, Fax: 916-851-3770. 

DATE: August 10, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00784-MCE -EFB Document 49 Filed 08/10/05 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 4.13



                 PLEDGED SHARE AMENDMENT

     This Pledged Share Amendment, dated as of December 23, 1997, is
delivered pursuant to Section 5 of the Pledge Agreement referred to
below.  The undersigned hereby agrees that this Pledged Share
Amendment may be attached to the Pledge Agreement dated as of May 26,
1992, between the undersigned and Chemical Bank, as Trustee (the
"Pledge Agreement"; capitalized terms defined therein being used
herein as therein defined), and that the Pledged Shares listed on
this Pledged Share Amendment shall be deemed to be part of the
Pledged Shares and shall become part of the Pledged Collateral and
shall secure all Senior Obligations as provided in the Pledge
Agreement.


          AMERICAN BANKNOTE CORPORATION


          By:  S/ Harvey J.  Kesner
          Name:  Harvey J.  Kesner
          Title:  Executive Vice President & General Counsel



                                                         Percentage of
                        Stock                            All Capital
              Class of  Certificate  Par     Number of   Stock
Stock Issuer  Stock     Number       value   Shares      Outstanding

ABN
Government
Services,
Inc.         Common     1             0.01    100         100%
Exhibit No. 32.1
 The X-Change Corporation
 File No.  000-53132
 Form 10-K
 For the year ended December 31, 2012
 
 
 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted
 Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 
 In connection with the Annual Report of The X-Change Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert J. Kane, Chief Executive Officer and Acting 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:
 
 (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: April 25, 2013
By:Robert J. KaneRobert J. KaneChief Executive Officer andActing Chief Financial Officer









A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The X-Change Corporation and will be retained by The X-Change Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS3927 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF JILCO INDUSTRIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JULY 31, 1997
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                             976
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   976
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     976
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          109,394
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     (108,418)
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       976
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,394
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,238
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,632)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (8,632)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)
        

</TABLE>