alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 23, 2009 

p0316 

Order 

 

March 23, 2009 

137217 & (18) 

 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137217 

 COA: 282850 

Saginaw CC: 78-000549-FY 

EARL JONES, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the motion for miscellaneous relief is GRANTED. The 

application for leave to appeal the July 10, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is 

considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of 

establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

KELLY, C.J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her dissenting 

statement in People v Scott, 480 Mich 1019 (2008).
July 1, 2015

Mr. Michael Travisano

Michael Angelo Photographers LLC

91 Salem Road

Brick, NJ 08724

Dear Mr. Travisano :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

part 21(h) and § § 45.23, 45.27(a), 45.29(3)(c)(d)(e)(f)(h), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.103, 91.119,

91.121, 91.151, 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409( a)(2), and 91.417(a) and

(b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process

your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can n o t Process Your Request

We entered your exemption request , posted to the public docket on April 27, 2015, on behalf

of Michael Angelo Photographers LLC into the public docket (No. FAA− 2015

− 1223 ), but we

are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does no t comply

with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further,

you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires yo u to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any que stions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst, Aircraft and

Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
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

LEE ANDREW REED, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0936 LKK GGH P

vs.

S. HAVERKAMP, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 19, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. In this

motion, plaintiff also alleges that he is in great pain and requests that he be transferred to a

medical facility.

Plaintiff is presently housed at Kern Valley State Prison (KVSP). No defendants

are located at KVSP. Plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief against individuals who are not named

as defendants in this action. This court is unable to issue an order against individuals who are

not parties to a suit pending before it. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395

U.S. 100, 112 (1969). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s request for

injunctive relief contained in his July 19, 2006, motion for appointment of counsel be denied.

Case 2:04-cv-00936-LKK -GGH Document 49 Filed 07/26/06 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

2

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: 7/26/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh:kj

re936.inj

Case 2:04-cv-00936-LKK -GGH Document 49 Filed 07/26/06 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 00-31267

_______________________

PARENTS AGAINST TESTING BEFORE TEACHING, an unincorporated association; CHARMAINE BRYANT, in dividually and on behalf of her

m inor child, Krystal Bryant; BRYANT SMOOT; STEPHEN SMOOT, individually and on behalf of their min or child, Lynette Smoot;

WAYNE THOMPSON; ROMONA THOMPSON, individually and on be half of
their minor children Savannah Thompso n and Stephen Thompson;

NATHANIEL BROWN; DIANNE BROWN, individually and on behalf of their
minor child, Irene Brown; ALTHEA FRAN KLIN, individually and on
beha lf of her minor child, Dominique Franklin; DIEDRA RAYFIELD, individually and on behalf of her minor child, Jessie Rayfield;

EVELYN MAGEE; MELVIN MAGEE, individually and on behal f of their
minor child, Maurice Magee; TAMAR ALLEN, individually and on behalf of her minor child, Daniel Allen; NAOMI MARK, individually and on behalf of her minor child, Tiffany Raines,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

ORLEANS PARISH SC HOOL BOARD; GAIL MOORE GLAPION, in her official capacity as Board President; THE LOUISIANA STATE BOARD OF

ELEMENTARY & S ECONDARY EDUCATION; GLENNY LEE BUQUET, in her capacity as president of the State Board of Elementar y and Secondary Education; CECIL PICARD, in his capacity as Louisiana’s State Superintendent of Education,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana Civil Docket #00-CV-2525

_________________________________________________________________

September 17, 2001* District Judge of the Southern District of Mississippi, sitting by

designation.

** 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.

2 Before DAVIS, and JONES, Circuit Judges and BARBOUR, District Judge. *

PER CURIAM: **

This court has carefully considered the issues on appeal

in light of the parties’ briefs, o ral argument, and pertinent

portions of the records. Having done so, we, first, find no

deficiency in the appellants’ notice of appeal and therefore have

appellate jurisdiction.

Next, we affirm for essentially the reasons stated by the

dist rict court. The court did not err in finding no due process

violations under federal or applicable state law. In particular,

the Deborah P. case cited by appellants pertains to the narrow

right of graduating seniors to obtain a diploma, and not to any

expectation of promotion in the public schools from year to year.

Deborah P. v. Turlington , 644 F.2d 397 (5th Cir. -- Unit B 1981).

Further, appellants’ briefing did not sustain their assertion of

private causes of action under federal sta tutes, including those

covering age discrimination. The district court did not abuse its

discretion in denying a preliminary injunction against the

administration of the LEAP21 test and enforcement of its results.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED

.
Exhibit 99.3


                                  CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of GolfGear
International, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify
with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"10-Q Report") that:

          (1)  the 10-Q 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 10-Q Report fairly presents, in
               all material respects, the financial condition and results of
               operations of the Company.

The undersigned have executed this Certification effective as of August 19,
2002.


                                     /s/ PETER H. POCKLINTON
                                By:  ----------------------------
                                     PETER H. POCKLINGTON
                                     Chief Executive Officer
                                     (Duly Authorized Officer)



                                     /s/DANIEL C. WRIGHT
                                By:  ----------------------------
                                     DANIEL C. WRIGHT
                                     Chief Financial Officer
                                     (Principal Financial Officer)


                                       23
<PAGE>
Analytics

FLETC All Website Data

All Web Site Data

Go to report 

FLETC.gov Search Performance Metrics Feb 1, 2020 - Feb 29, 2020

Visits to FLETC.gov

105,401

% of Total: 100.00% (105,401)

Total Internal Searches

0

% of Total: 0.00% (0)

Total External Searches (Google)

66,301

% of Total: 62.90% (105,401)

Top Internal Searches by Search Term

Search Term Total Unique Searches Organic Searches

There is no data for this view.

Top External Searches (Google - as reported)

Page Title Sessions

Welcome to FLETC | FLETC 10,653

Search the Training Catalog | FLETC 3,274

Glynco, Georgia | FLETC 2,863

FedBizOpps | FLETC 1,776

Execution of a Search Warrant (I) (MP

3) | FLETC

1,347

Customs and Border Protection, Officer

Basic Training | FLETC

1,238

PEB Scores for Age and Gender | FLET

C

1,217

Physical Efficiency Battery (PEB) | FLET

C

1,162

Federal Conspiracy Law (Mp3) | FLETC 912

Charleston, South Carolina | FLETC 911

New vs. Returned Visitors

Avg. Visits per Visitor

New Visitor Returning Visitor

20.1%

79.9%

1 2 Other

21.1%

13%

65.9%

© 2020 Google

All Users

100.00% Sessions
Analytics

FLETC All Website Data

All Web Site Data

Go to report 

FLETC.gov Web Performance Metrics Feb 1, 2020 - Feb 29, 2020

Total Visits

105,401

% of Total: 100.00% (105,401)

Avg. Visit Duration

00:02:33

Avg for View: 00:02:33 (0.00%)

Pageviews

352,270

% of Total: 100.00% (352,270)

Unique Visitors

77,011

% of Total: 100.00% (77,011)

Avg. Pages / Visit

3.34

Avg for View: 3.34 (0.00%)

Avg. Time on Page

00:01:05

Avg for View: 00:01:05 (0.00%)

Bounce Rate

49.61%

Avg for View: 49.61% (0.00%)

Top Pages

Page Title Pageviews

Bounce

Rate

Search the Training Catalog | FLET

C

75,922 29.86%

Welcome to FLETC | FLETC 37,196 39.69%

Glynco, Georgia | FLETC 15,822 40.81%

Locations | FLETC 9,618 42.22%

Resources | FLETC 6,335 52.02%

Basic Programs | FLETC 6,188 36.11%

State, Local & Tribal Law Enforcem

ent Training | FLETC

5,857 34.01%

PEB Scores for Age and Gender | F

LETC

5,210 12.84%

Glynco Campus Life | FLETC 5,081 45.35%

Careers and Internships | FLETC 4,827 40.59%

Visits by Social Network

Social Network Sessions

Facebook 1,372

Twitter 68

LinkedIn 24

reddit 10

Instagram 8

YouTube 8

Yelp 4

Pinterest 3

Blogger 1

Instagram Stories 1

Visits by Source

New vs. Returned Visitors

google (direct) bing

search.usa.gov usajobs.gov

Other

9.6%

23.1%

56%

New Visitor Returning Visitor

20.1%

79.9%

© 2020 Google

All Users

100.00% Sessions
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

____________________________________ 

 ) 

MUKHTAR YAHYA NAJEE ) 

AL WARAFI ) 

 ) 

Petitioner, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) Civil Action No. 09-2368 (RCL)

 ) 

BARACK H. OBAMA, et al., ) 

 ) 

Respondents. ) 

____________________________________) 

 

 ORDER

Upon consideration of Petitioner Mukhtar al Warafi’s Consent Motion for 

Extension of Time, it is hereby ordered: 

Petitioner’s Consent Motion for Extension of Time is granted. Petitioner shall file 

his response to the Respondents’ post-hearing brief on or before February 19, 2010. 

SO ORDERED. 

 ___________/s/_________________________ 

 

United States District Judge 

 Date: ______2/16/2010___________________
II 

Calendar No. 515 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1573 

[Report No. 115–301] 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture 

to place signage on Federal land along the trail known as the ‘‘American 

Discovery Trail’’, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 18, 2017 

Mr. COONS (for himself and Mrs. CAPITO) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

JULY 16, 2018 

Reported by Ms. MURKOWSKI, with an amendment 

[Omit the part struck through] 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary 

of Agriculture to place signage on Federal land along 

the trail known as the ‘‘American Discovery Trail’’, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1573 RS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Discovery 

3 Trail Act of 2017’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

5 In this Act: 

6 (1) SECRETARY CONCERNED.—The term ‘‘Sec7 retary concerned’’ means— 

8 (A) the Secretary of the Interior, with re9 spect to Federal land under the jurisdiction of 

10 the Secretary of the Interior; or 

11 (B) the Secretary of Agriculture, with re12 spect to Federal land under the jurisdiction of 

13 the Secretary of Agriculture. 

14 (2) TRAIL.—The term ‘‘Trail’’ means the trail 

15 known as the ‘‘American Discovery Trail’’, which 

16 consists of approximately 6,800 miles of trails ex17 tending from Cape Henlopen State Park in Dela18 ware to Point Reyes National Seashore in California, 

19 as generally described in volume 2 of the National 

20 Park Service feasibility study dated June 1995. 

21 SEC. 3. SIGNAGE ALONG THE AMERICAN DISCOVERY TRAIL. 

22 (a) SIGNAGE AUTHORIZED.—As soon as practicable 

23 after the date on which signage acceptable to the Sec24 retary concerned is donated to the United States for place25 ment on Federal land at points along the Trail, the SecVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:15 Jul 17, 2018 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1573.RS S1573

pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1573 RS

1 retary concerned shall place the signage on the Federal 

2 land. 

3 (b) NO FEDERAL FUNDS.—No Federal funds may be 

4 used to acquire signage authorized for placement under 

5 subsection (a). 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 515 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1573 

[Report No. 115–301] 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior and the 

Discovery Trail’’, and for other purposes. eral land along the trail known as the ‘‘American Secretary of Agriculture to place signage on FedJULY 16, 2018 

Reported with an amendment 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 10.2




FIFTH AMENDED AND RESTATED REVOLVING NOTE







U.S. $60,000,000.00

October 7, 2016




FOR VALUE RECEIVED, on the Termination Date (as defined in the Loan Agreement referred to hereinafter), the undersigned, Duluth Holdings Inc., a Wisconsin corporation (the “Borrower”), promises to pay to the order of BMO Harris Bank N.A. (the “Lender”) the maximum principal sum of Sixty Million and 00/100 U.S. Dollars (U.S. $60,000,000.00) or, if less, the aggregate unpaid principal amount of all Advances (as defined in the Loan Agreement) made by the Lender to the Borrower pursuant to Section 3.1 of the Loan Agreement, together with interest pursuant to the Loan Agreement.

The Borrowers promise to pay interest on the unpaid principal amount hereof from the date hereof until such principal amount is paid in full at the rates and at the times provided in the Loan Agreement.

This Note is the Note referred to in the Second Amended and Restated Loan Agreement between Borrower and Lender dated as of the date hereof (as amended, modified, supplemented or restated from time to time, the “Loan Agreement”).

Presentment and demand for payment, notice of dishonor, protest and notice of protest are hereby waived.  Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the Borrower agrees to pay costs of collection and reasonable attorneys’ fees (whether or not suit is commenced), including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees and legal expenses incurred in connection with any appeal of a lower court’s judgment or order.






			
	 
	 
	 









This Note is an amendment and restatement of the Fourth Amended and Restated Revolving Note dated as of July 27, 2015 executed by Borrower and Duluth Trading Company, LLC, a Wisconsin limited liability company, in favor of Lender, in the maximum principal amount of $40,000,000.00, and is not a novation.




DULUTH HOLDINGS INC.







By:

/s/ Mark DeOrio                                      

Mark DeOrio, Senior Vice President and



Chief Financial Officer










































































































[Signature Page – Fifth Amended and Restated Revolving Note]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

 

 

DOUGLAS ENGRAHM,

Plaintiff(s),

vs. CIV-S-04-1290-GEB/GGH 

COUNTY OF COLUSA, COUNTY OF 

COLUSA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC

WORKS, JON S. WRYSINKI, et al.,

Defendant(s).

______________________________________/

 Defendant and Counter-Claimants filed a discovery motion on September 8,

2005 set for hearing September 29 @ 10:00 a.m.. Notwithstanding the three days specified by

E.D. Cal. L.R. 37-251 the joint statement shall be filed in no later than five court days before

the scheduled hearing. Notwithstanding E.D. Cal. L.R. 5-133(f), if the joint statement is more

than 25 pages, or the attachments are longer than 50 pages, the copy shall be hand delivered or

sent by overnight mail to chambers on the day of filing. The filing deadline, accordingly, will be

September 22, 2005.

The dispute may be organized by category, with specific discovery items attached,

if appropriate, as an exhibit. For each disputed category or individual item, include: (1) the

specific disputed discovery category or item; (2) the response; (3) the moving party’s position;

and (4) the opposition. E.D.Cal. L.R. 37-251(c)(3). Do not file separate briefing. Id.

Privilege objections must comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5). Except in

extraordinary circumstances, the party claiming privilege may not submit a post-hearing privilege

log. The failure properly to support a privilege objection with a privilege log may be deemed to

waive it. 

The moving party is responsible for filing the joint statement. The opposing party

nevertheless must timely draft and submit its portion. Failure of either party to use best efforts to

ensure timely filing will be cause for sanctions. 

Dated: 9/13/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 ___________________________________

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

U.S. Magistrate Judge

engrahm.251

Case 2:04-cv-01290-GEB-GGH Document 42 Filed 09/14/05 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements of the Company for the twelve months
ended December 31, 1998, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000054291
<NAME> KAISER ALUMINUM & CHEMICAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                              98
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      294
<ALLOWANCES>                                         6
<INVENTORY>                                        544
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,035
<PP&E>                                           1,987
<DEPRECIATION>                                     878
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,995
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              559
<BONDS>                                            963
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               20
<PREFERRED>                                          2
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                         107
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,995
<SALES>                                          2,256
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,256
<CGS>                                            1,906
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,906
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   144
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 110
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (16)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (16)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  3
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         3
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>