alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 his notice of appeal, plaintiff states erroneously that this action was dismissed for

failure to file objections. The case was dismissed for failure to exhaust available administrative

remedies prior to bringing this action. The dismissal was based on the evidence offered by

plaintiff himself in opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TONY CAMPBELL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1292 MCE DAD P

vs.

J. BAILEY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights action. On

November 10, 2005, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal together with untimely objections to

findings and recommendations that were filed on September 14, 2005. The findings and

recommendations were adopted on November 2, 2005, and the action was closed on that date.

Although plaintiff alleges that his objections were previously placed in the mail to

the court, the allegation is not supported by evidence. Moreover, the arguments made in the

objections are not supported by any evidence that plaintiff exhausted available administrative

remedies prior to bringing this action.1

Case 2:04-cv-01292-MCE -DAD Document 26 Filed 11/18/05 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

2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s untimely objections to the findings

and recommendations filed September 14, 2005, will be disregarded.

DATED: November 17, 2005.

DAD:13

camp1292.58

Case 2:04-cv-01292-MCE -DAD Document 26 Filed 11/18/05 Page 2 of 2
##### 



Exhibit 32 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the following certifications are being made to
accompany the Registrants annual report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year
ended June 30, 2003: Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350 I, Michael J. Koss, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Koss
Corporation (the Company) hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that: (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the fiscal quarter
ended June 30, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended; and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. Date: November 17, 2004 /s/ Michael J. Koss
EX-10.13



 Exhibit 10.13 
  

			
		  	




	
	Internal Memo

  

									
	To:	  	Brian Webb-Walsh	 	From:	 	Ashok Vemuri	  	Xerox Corporation
		  		 		 	Chief Executive Officer	  	45 Glover Avenue
		  		 		 	Xerox Services	  	Norwalk, CT 06856-4505
					
	C:	  	P. Dowd, D. Ford,	 	Date:	 	September 6, 2016	  	
		  	S. Morno-Wade	 		 		  	

 New Position 
 Brian, I am
pleased to offer you the position of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Conduent, effective upon separation. In the interim, you will be nominated for election as a Corporate Officer of Xerox Corporation at the October 2016 Xerox
Board of Director’s meeting. 
 In light of your new role, your base salary will increase from $295,000 to $450,000, effective October 1, 2016. Your
2016 annual bonus target for the remainder of the year will increase to 75% of your new base salary, also effective October 1, 2016. Your E-LTIP target award value (to be granted during the annual 2017 LTI cycle) will increase to $975,000. 

You will also receive a special one-time Restricted Stock Unit award with a value of $250,000 at the time of the initial grant. This award will be effective
October 1, 2016. A formal award package will be provided shortly after the grant date. 
 If elected to Corporate Officer, your stock ownership requirement
will increase. Further information on your stock ownership requirement will be sent at that time. 
 I look forward to your acceptance of this offer and
believe you will make significant contributions to Conduent. 
 If you have any questions, please call Darrell Ford at XXX-XXX-XXXX. 

Sincerely, 
 Ashok Vemuri 

I ☒ Accept    ☐ Decline this offer. 
  

							
	 /s/ Brian Webb-Walsh
	 		 		 	9/6/16
	Signature	 		 		 	Date

 Xerox Internal Use Only
Exhibit 10.9
 KATY INDUSTRIES, INC.  2008 Chief Financial Officers Plan
            (iii)
    
    a transaction or transactions in which any Person or a group of Persons acting
in concert acquires stock of the Company in an amount greater than that held by
Kohlberg & Co. LLC (Kohlberg) and Kohlberg Affiliates and in which Kohlberg
relinquishes control of the Board.




---



##### 



Article VII
 
  
  2




---



##### 



Shares Issued
 Aggregate Limit Article VI
 
 Award
 Option Price
 Payment
 
  3




---



##### 



Article VI
 
 Article VI
 Article VII Article
VII
 
  
 Employment
  Tax Withholding
 4




---



##### 



Share Withholding
 Severability
 Securities Law and Tax Law Compliance
 Governing Law
 5
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                      17,796,059
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,686,185
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          707,382
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,007,439)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,686,185
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               817,845
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              86,566
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (904,411)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (904,411)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (904,411)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.045)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.045)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7392
ALBERNIE STUDWELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WARDEN of the St. Brides Correctional Center, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at A lexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-97-687-AM) Submitted: December 18, 1997 Decided: January 7, 1998 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albernie Studwell, Appellant Pro Se. John Kenneth Byrum, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate ofappealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Studwell v. Warden , No. CA-97-687-AM (E.D. Va. Sept. 3, 1997). We further deny Studwell's motion to subpoena medical records and motion for extension of time to respond in district court as moot. 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
(Reap. Dec. 8180)

#### Mutual Supply Co. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 7277; 11267.

(Decided December 2, 1952)

*Lawrence & Tuttle (George R. Tuttle*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Charles J. Wagner,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Olivee, Chief Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated as follows between counsel for plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, concerning the merchandise referred to herein:

> 1) That this stipulation is limited to so much of said merchandise as is described in the invoices as clams in 5-ounee cans or tins, such items being marked “A” and initialed by Examiner W. B. Lim, and said article being appraised on the basis of the American selling price in accordance with the Presidential proclamation published in TD 47031.

> 2) That such merchandise is the same in all material respects as the imported clams involved in Mutual Supply Co. v. US, RD 5815, US v. Mutual Supply Co., RD 5950, Alexander & Baldwin v. US, RD 6044, and Universal Foreign Service Co. v. US, RD 6046; and that the issues herein are the same in all material respects as the issues involved in said decisions.

> 3) That upon the dates of exportation to the United States of the merchandise covered by these appeals, like or similar merchandise manufactured or produced in the United States was being freely offered for sale and sold to all purchasers in the principal market of the United States in the ordinary course of trade and in the usual wholesale quantities, including all containers and coverings and all costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for delivery, at the following prices per dozen cans or tins, less a cash discount of 1 *Yz*percent:

> *5-ounce size Per dozen*

> January 1, 1934, to May 31, 1935_$1. 00

> June 1, 1935, to Nov. 30, 1936_ . 90

> 4)That the records in said decided cases may be incorporated herein and that upon this stipulation these appeals may be deemed submitted, they being limited to the items marked *“A”*on the invoices and abandoned as to all other merchandise.

*504On the agreed, facts, I find the American selling price, as that value is defined in section 402 (g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, tobe the *proper*basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise described on the invoices as clams in 5-ounce cans or tins, marked “A” and initialed by examiner W. B. Lim, and that such values, for merchandise exported during the specified periods, are as follows:

> *6-ounce size Per dozen*

> January 1, 1934 to May 31, 1935_ $1. 00

> June 1, 1935, to November 30, 1936_ 0. 90

> Hess *1%*per centum cash J discount

The appeals having been abandoned insofar as they relate to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeals are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATION

I, Thomas E. Mills, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AMP Productions,
Ltd.;

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

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.     I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and I have:

a)     designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b)     evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c)     presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5.     I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

a)     all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b)     any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6.     I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including
any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

August 11, 2009



By     /s/ Thomas Mills
       Thomas E. Mills
       President,  Chief  Executive  Officer,
       Chief  Financial  Officer,  and
       Principal Accounting Officer
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

JEFFREY HORSTMAN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1644 GEB DAD P

vs.

J. CANTU, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has filed a motion for appointment of counsel. The United States

Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent

indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298

(1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of

counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.

1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the

court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that

plaintiff’s February 21, 2006 motion for appointment of counsel is denied.

DATED: April 5, 2006.

DAD:13:bb

hors1644.31

Case 2:04-cv-01644-GEB-DAD Document 17 Filed 04/06/06 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 40 (Thursday, March 1, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9320-9321]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-3600]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-174-000]


Columbia Gulf Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

February 23, 2007.
    Take notice that on February 16, 2007, Columbia Gulf Transmission 
Company (Columbia Gulf) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff 
sheets with a proposed effective date of June 1, 2007:

Eighth Revised Sheet No. 216.
Original Sheet No. 216A.

[[Page 9321]]

Original Sheet No. 216B.
Original Sheet No. 216C.
Fifth Revised Sheet No. 217.
First Revised Sheet No. 218.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). 
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on 
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c5838097868aaba9acaba096b0b5b5aab7b185a3a0b7a6eba2aab3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7d3b382f3e3213111413182e080d0d120f093d1b180f1e531a120b">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-3600 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk March 23, 2009

d0316 

# Order

March 23, 2009

136952

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 136952 COA: 275300 Bay CC: 06-010509-FH ARTHUR JAMES BRIDGES, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 10, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
No. 46130.

#### Protests 991449-G, etc., of New York Mdse. Co., Inc., et al. (Los Angeles, etc.).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400-the court dismissed the protests.
No. 52577.—

protest 139304-K (New York).

#### Thorens Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cereal or baby dishes similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Thorens, Inc.*v. *United States*(19 Cust. Ct. 67, C. D. 1069), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

 SACRAMENTO DIVISION

TOMMY ROY KEETON,

Plaintiff,

v.

SERGEANT CAROLL, et al.,

Defendants.

2:04-cv-0697 GEB JFM P

ORDER GRANTING

DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, Defendants’ request for an extension of time to file a

motion for summary judgment is granted. Defendants shall file their motion for summary

judgment no later than October 23, 2006. 

Dated: October 23, 2006.

/keet0697.ext

Case 2:04-cv-00697-ALA Document 77 Filed 10/24/06 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4439 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4439

    To require the Assistant Secretary of Financial Markets of the 
 Department of the Treasury to brief certain Senate committees on the 
                    debt issuance of the Department.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 3, 2024

  Mr. Hagerty introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To require the Assistant Secretary of Financial Markets of the 
 Department of the Treasury to brief certain Senate committees on the 
                    debt issuance of the Department.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Transparency in Debt Issuance Act of 
2024''.

SEC. 2. BRIEFINGS.

    (a) In General.--The Assistant Secretary for Financial Markets of 
the Department of the Treasury shall brief the Committee on Finance and 
the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate on a 
quarterly basis about the debt issuance of the Department, including a 
summary of recommendations made by the Treasury Borrowing Advisory 
Committee.
    (b) Timing.--The briefings required under subsection (a) should 
coincide with the publication of the quarterly refunding report of the 
Department of the Treasury.
                                 <all>
```