alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
12-827

Travers v. Commissioner of Social Security

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION

TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED

AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS

COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT

FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX

OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A

PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY

NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 

1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals

2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United

3 States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York,

on the 26th 4 day of March, two thousand thirteen.

5

6 PRESENT:

7 DENNIS JACOBS,

8 Chief Judge,

9 JOSÉ A. CABRANES,

10 CHESTER J. STRAUB,

11 Circuit Judges.

12 _____________________________________

13

14 Lori S. Travers,

15

16 Plaintiff-Appellant,

17

18 v. 12-827

19

20 Commissioner of Social Security,

21

22 Defendant-Appellee.

23 _____________________________________

24

25 FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: Lori S. Travers, pro se,

26 New York, New York.

27
1 FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE: Susan C. Branagan, Sarah S.

2 Normand, Assistant United

3 States Attorneys, for Preet

4 Bharara, United States

5 Attorney for the Southern

6 District of New York, New

7 York, New York.

8

9 Appeal from the order of the United States District

10 Court for the Southern District of New York (Gardephe, J.).

11

12 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED,

13 AND DECREED that the order of the district court is

14 AFFIRMED.

15

16 Lori S. Travers appeals the district court’s order

17 denying her preliminary injunctive relief in her action

18 seeking review of the denial of disability benefits. We

19 assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts,

20 the procedural history of the case, and the issues on

21 appeal.

22

23 As an initial matter, we lack jurisdiction to review

24 the magistrate judge’s November 2011 report and

25 recommendation (recommending that the district court grant

26 the Commissioner judgment on the pleadings) because the

27 district court has yet to pass on that report and

28 recommendation and enter a final order. LoSacco v. City of

29 Middletown, 71 F.3d 88, 91-92 (2d Cir. 1995).

30

31 We review the denial of a motion for a preliminary

32 injunction for abuse of discretion. Malletier v. Burlington

33 Coat Factory Warehouse Corp., 426 F.3d 532, 537 (2d Cir.

34 2005). The district court did not abuse its discretion in

35 denying injunctive relief based upon its conclusion that

36 Travers had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the

37 merits.

38

39 Finding no merit in Travers’s remaining arguments, we

40 AFFIRM the order of the district court.

41

42 FOR THE COURT: 

43 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk

2
#### James E. YOUNG, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-2103.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 11, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 13, 1977.

Alan H. Schreiber, Public Defender, and Stuart M. Lerner, Asst. Public Defender, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Marsha G. Madorsky, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Our study of the briefs and record in this case discloses no reversible error to have been committed.

Regarding appellant’s third point on appeal involving the trial court’s reinstruction of the jury, *see Henry v. State,*350 So.2d 512, opinion filed September 27,1977.

AFFIRMED.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and DOWNEY and LETTS, JJ., concur.
Case No. 10,077.

#### NEBRASKA v. POLLOCK.

[This is a state case. See 23 Int. Rev. Rec. 297.) _
#### Eddie Lee McCARTHY, as Administrator of the Estate of Edith Marie McCarthy, Deceased, etc., Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital, Appellee.

No. 76-2111.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 20, 1977.

*194Ser, Keyfetz, DeCardenas & Levine and Edward P. Busch, Miami, for appellant.

Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Knight and Henry Burnett, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and KEHOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See *Adams Engineering Co. v. Construction Products Corp.,*156 So.2d 497 (Fla.1963); *St. Anne Airways Corp. v. Larotonda,*308 So.2d 129 (Fla.3d DCA 1975); *Reddish v. Forlines,*207 So.2d 703 (Fla.1st DCA 1968); and Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.420(e).
**Exhibit 23.2**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We consent to the incorporation byreference in Registration Statement No. 333-100409 on Form S-3 and RegistrationStatements No. 333-51458, No. 333-08992, No. 333-38455, No. 333-04609, No. 333-112103,No. 33-53988, No. 33-19662, No. 2-87376, No. 33-33566, and No. 333-91389 on Form S-8of Ault Incorporated and Subsidiaries of our report dated August 18, 2003 (August 29,2003 as to Note 4), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of AultIncorporated and Subsidiaries for the year ended May 30, 2004. 

/s/   Deloitte & Touche LLP 

Minneapolis, Minnesota
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 159 (Monday, August 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21767]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-165-006]


Alabama-Tennessee Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes 
in FERC Gas Tariff

August 12, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 6, 1997, Midcoast Interstate 
Transmission, Inc. (formerly Alabama-Tennessee Natural Gas Company, 
hereinafter MIT), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet to be effective 
June 1, 1997.

Second Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 154

    MIT states that the tariff sheet is filed in compliance with the 
July 29, 1997 letter order issued in the captioned proceeding.
    MIT states that copies of its filing were served on all affected 
entities.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. All such protests should 
be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's 
Regulations. 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. Copies of this filing are 
on file and available for public inspection in the Public Reference 
Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21767 Filed 8-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 32.2
Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as Adopted Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Report of Cintas Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending May 31, 2010 (the "Report"), I, William C. Gale, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



/s/

William C. Gale
William C. Gale
Principal Financial OfficerJuly 30, 2010


78

---
#### Joel I. FORREST v. Bill LYNCH and Times Picayune Publishing Co.

No. 60431.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 28, 1977.

In re: Times Picayune Publishing Co. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of E. Baton Rouge. 347 So.2d 1255.

Denied. No error of law.

DENNIS, J., would grant the writ.

MARCUS, J., recused.
#### STATE ex rel. Lloyd BAILEY v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 97-KH-3130.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1998.

In re Bailey, Lloyd; — Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs;. Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “H”, No. 370-433; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth District, No. 97KW-1527.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; *State ex rel. Melinie v. State,*93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.

TRAYLOR, J., not on panel.
# C_2023281EN.01002301.xml

| 10.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 281/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/23

---

Corrigendum to Council Decision of 14 July 2023 amending Decision 98/481/EC approving the external auditors of the European Central Bank

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 275 of 4 August 2023
  )

(2023/C 281/08)

| 1. | On the second cover page, in the table of contents, and on page 19, in the title: |
| --- | --- |

1.

for:

‘... of 14 July 2023 ...’,

read:

‘... of 25 July 2023 ...’.

| 2. | On page 20, in the concluding formula: |
| --- | --- |

2.

On page 20, in the concluding formula:

for:

‘Done at Brussels, 14 July 2023.’,

read:

‘Done at Brussels, 25 July 2023.’.

---
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

Certification of Treasurer



I, Ramon Chimelis, Treasurer, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Big Sky Industries II, Inc.;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3.

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

4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



Dated: January 29, 2009



/s/ Ramon Chimelis

Ramon Chimelis, Treasurer
```

[106th Congress Private Law 11]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:pvtl011.106]

[[Page 114 STAT. 3105]]

Private Law 106-11
106th Congress

                                 An Act

 
     For the relief of Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi. <<NOTE: Nov. 9, 
                         2000 -  [H.R. 3184]>> 

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR ZOHREH FARHANG GHAHFAROKHI.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi 
shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of 
status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence 
upon filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under 
section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi enters the 
United States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), 
she shall be considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, 
if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under 
section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an immigrant 
visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed with 
appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.

    Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent residence to 
Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi, the Secretary of State shall instruct the 
proper officer to reduce by one, during the current or next following 
fiscal year, the total number of immigrant visas that are made available 
to natives of the country of the alien's birth under section 203(a) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total number 
of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 202(e) of such Act.

    Approved November 9, 2000.
```
# Ms. Cathy Contreras

### Acquisition Executive

### 

### 

DLA Aviation is the aviation demand and supply chain manager for Defense Logistics Agency with more than 4,000 civilian and military personnel in 22 locations across the United States and one location outside the continental U.S. DLA Aviation supports more than 2,341 major weapon systems and is the U.S. military's integrated material manager for more than 1.8 million national stock number items, industrial retail supply and depot-level reparable acquisitions.

As DLA Aviation’s senior acquisition executive, Ms. Contreras shares full managerial responsibility for all aviation supply chain acquisition operations. She is engaged in the full range of logistics and acquisition planning, life-cycle management, and mission management of worldwide aviation items.

Ms. Contreras has experience serving in a wide variety of positions within DoD and DLA.  Her previous assignments include leading both the Information Technology and Telecommunications Divisions of Defense Contracting Command at the Pentagon, and Chief of Strategic Contracting, Chief of the Strategic Material Sourcing Group, Chief of Procurement Systems and Policy, Chief of Supplier Relationship Management, and Director of Strategic Acquisition Programs, all at DLA.  She also spent two years in DLA Aviation’s Base Realignment and Closure office and successfully transitioned five depot-level reparable sites from the military services to DLA Aviation.

Ms. Contreras graduated from James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia. with a Bachelor of Arts in business administration. She graduated from Frostburg State University, Frostburg, Maryland. with a master’s in business administration; and earned a master’s in National Resource Strategy from National Defense University, Washington, District of Columbia.
EXHIBIT 32
                                                                    ----------

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

I, Jeff Criswell, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
of Cyberads, Inc. (the "Company") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to my knowledge:

This Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended
September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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, 2005
                                          /s/ JEFF CRISWELL
                                          ----------------------
                                          Jeff Criswell
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
                                          Chief Financial Officer
#### The STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Christopher JOHNSON, a/k/a Christopher Porter, Appellee.

No. 76-2384.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 27, 1977.

Richard E. Gerstein, State Atty., and Dennis L. Curran, Asst. State Atty., for appellant.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Paul Morris, Asst. Public Defender, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and NATHAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant-appellee confessed that the trial court erred in entering an order granting his oral motion for relief under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850, which vacated his judgment and sentence. Therefore, the order is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.
CONFIRMATION OF MAILING





British Columbia Securities Commission
Alberta Securities Commission
Ontario Securities Commission
Commission des valeurs mobilieres du Quebec
The Manitoba Securities Commission
New Brunswick, Office of the Administrator
Newfoundland, Department of Government Services and Lands
Government of the Northwest Territories
Nova Scotia Securities Commission
Prince Edward Island, Registrar of Securities
Saskatchewan Securities Commission
Yukon, Registrar of Securities
Nunavut, Securities Division, Department of Justice

Toronto Stock Exchange


                    Re: Vasogen Inc. - SEDAR PROFILE NO. 1047

I hereby certify that Vasogen Inc. has sent the following items by pre-paid mail
on October 13, 2006, to each shareholder on the supplemental mailing list,
pursuant to the Canadian Securities Administrators' National Instrument 54-101
regarding communication to shareholders:

       (1)    interim financial statements for the period ending August 31,
              2006; and
       (2)    interim Management's Discussion and Analysis for the period ending
              August 31, 2006.

Dated this 13th day of October, 2006



/s/ Glenn Neumann
----------------------
Glenn Neumann
Director of Investor Relations
##### 



Exhibit 21. Subsidiaries of the
Company

|                                         |  |                 |          |                              |  |                                         
|---------------------------------------- |  | --------------- | -------- | ---------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------
|                                         |  | Jurisdiction of |          | Names Under Which Subsidiary
|Name of Subsidiary                       |  | Incorporation   |          | Transacts Business          
|                                         |  |                 |          |                             
|Hudson Valley Bank                       |  |                 | New York |                              |  | Hudson Valley Bank                      
|Hudson Valley Investment Corp.           |  |                 | Delaware |                              |  | Hudson Valley Investment Corp.          
|Sprain Brook Realty Corp.                |  |                 | New York |                              |  | Sprain Brook Realty Corp.               
|Grassy Sprain Real Estate Holdings, Inc. |  |                 | New York |                              |  | Grassy Sprain Real Estate Holdings, Inc.
|HVB Leasing Corp.                        |  |                 | New York |                              |  | HVB Leasing Corp.                       
|HVB Realty Corp.                         |  |                 | New York |                              |  | HVB Realty Corp.                        
|HVB Employment Corp.                     |  |                 | New York |                              |  | HVB Employment Corp.                    
|A.R. Schmeidler & Co., Inc.              |  |                 | New York |                              |  | A.R. Schmeidler & Co., Inc.             
|NYNB Bank(1)                             |  |                 | New York |                              |  | NYNB Bank                               
|369 East 149thStreet Corp.(1)            |  |                 | New York |                              |  | 369 East 149thStreet Corp.              



---



|    |                            
|--- | ---------------------------
|(1) | Added as of January 1, 2006
#### Morris *v.*Bulletin Co., a Corp., Appellant.

Argued October 5, 1933.

Before Keller, Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadteeld, Parker and James, JJ.

*378
      *Louis Wagner,*and with him *Richard A.. Smith*and *Thomas J. Clary,*for appellant.

*379
      *Leon Glaser,*and with him *Louis Wolfe Schlisman,*for appellee.

October 26, 1933:

Pee Cubiam,

Thei judgment is affirmed, on the opinion of the learned court below. .

Appellant a.sks for an interpretation of that clause of the Act of April 13, 1927, P. L. 186, sec. 5, which provides: “Whenever any claim for compensation ......is finally adjudicated in favor of the claimant, the *amounts*of compensation actually due at the time the first payment is made after such adjudication, shall bear interest at the rate of six per centum per annum.” We think the meaning is sufficiently clearly expressed. If an appeal is taken by the employer or insurance carrier from an award! of compensation, thus delaying or postponing the instalments of weekly compensation, and the appeal is unsuccessful, the claimant shall be entitled to receive, at the time of the first payment made on the award, not only the accumulated unpaid instalments of compensation then due and payable, but also interest: at six per cent on the- respective instalments from the time they would have been paid if the appeal had not been taken. The effect of the Act is to put the claimant, when his right to compensation is finally adjudicated in his favor, after appeal, in the same position as if no appeal had been, taken, considering interest at six per cent equivalent to the loss of the use of the money.