alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 17-1376V Filed: July 24, 2018

UNPUBLISHED

NATHAN COULTER,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Ann Mayhew Golski, Maglio Christopher and T oale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner. Ilene Clair Albala, U.S. Department of Ju stice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Dorsey , Chief Special Master:

On September 28, 2017, Nathan Coulte r (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Inju ry Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.

, 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered right shoulder injuries as a result of an infl uenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on October 16,

2016. Petition at 1-2. The case was assi gned to the Special Pr ocessing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On July 23, 2018, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that petitioner is entitled to com pensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent states that “the bursitis petitioner su ffered is consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administr ation (‘SIRVA’), a Table injury, following

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reaso ned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Cour t of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other inform ation, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, t he undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Ac t will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).2 administration of the flu vaccine he received on October 16, 2016.” Id. at 5. Respondent further agrees that “[b]ased on the medica l records outlined above, petitioner met the stat utory requirements by suffering t he condition for more than six months. Therefore, based on the record as it now stands, petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for com pensation under the Act.” Id. at 5-6.

In view of respondent’s positio n and the evidence of record, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief Special Master
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 179 (Tuesday, September 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 48629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24532]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Defense Science Board Task Force on Open Systems

ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board Task Force on Open Systems will meet 
in open session on October 9, 1997 at Strategic Analysis, Inc., 4001 N. 
Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia.
    The mission of the Defense Science Board is to advise the Secretary 
of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition on 
scientific and technical matters as they affect the perceived needs of 
the Department of Defense.
    Persons interested in further information should call Ms. Marya 
Bavis at (703) 527-5410.

    Dated: September 11, 1997.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-24532 Filed 9-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
```
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

UNITED STATES ) ACM 39071 (rem)

Appellee )

)

v. )

) ORDER

Xavier L. RICE )

Staff Sergeant (E-5) )

U.S. Air Force )

Appellant ) Panel 1

A general court-martial composed of officers convicted Appellant, contrary 

to his pleas, of three specifications of abusive sexual contact (Specifications 3, 

4, and 5 of the Charge) and one specification of assault consummated by a battery (a lesser included offense of Specification 2 of the Charge) in violation of 

Articles 120 and 128, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. §§ 

920, 928. The members sentenced Appellant to a bad-conduct discharge, 30 

days of hard labor without confinement, and reduction to E-1. The convening 

authority approved the sentence as adjudged. This court affirmed the findings 

and sentence. United States v. Rice, No. ACM 39071, 2017 CCA LEXIS 745 

(A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 21 Nov. 2017).

The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) granted 

review on the following issue:

WHETHER THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN 

DECIDING THAT A PROPENSITY INSTRUCTION IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES v. HILLS WAS HARMLESS BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT BECAUSE IT DID NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE VERDICT.

The CAAF summarily reversed our decision as to Specifications 3, 4, and 5 

of the Charge and the sentence, set aside the findings of guilty as to Specifications 3, 4, and 5 of the Charge and the sentence, and affirmed the remaining 

findings. The summary disposition returned the record to the Judge Advocate 

General of the Air Force for remand to this court and expressly stated that this 

court may order a rehearing on Specifications 3, 4, and 5 of the Charge and the 

sentence. United States v. Rice, ___M.J.___ , No. 18-0101, 2018 CAAF LEXIS 

208 (C.A.A.F. 18 Apr. 2018).
United States v. Rice, No. ACM 39071 (rem)

2

Accordingly it is by the court on this 11th day of July, 2018,

ORDERED:

The record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General for remand 

to the convening authority for further action consistent with CAAF’s decision; 

a rehearing as to Specifications 3, 4, and 5 of the Charge and the sentence is 

authorized. Article 66(e), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. 

§ 866(e). 

FOR THE COURT

CAROL K. JOYCE

Clerk of the Court
exv10w9



 







    Exhibit 10.9



 




    Summary
    of Compensation for

    Non-Employee Directors and Named Executive
    Officers



 




    Non-Employee
    Director Compensation Summary



 



    Annual Retainer






    $35,000, payable in cash or stock






    Additional $5,000 for serving as chair of the Compensation or
    Directors Affairs/Corporate Governance Committees (increasing to
    $6,500 on March 31, 2008)






    Additional $7,500 for serving as chair of the Audit Committee
    (increasing to $10,000 on March 31, 2008)






    Committee chair compensation is payable in cash



 


 



    Board and Committee Meeting Fees






    $1,500 per meeting for each Board of Directors or Committee
    meeting attended






    $1,000 per meeting for each Committee meeting attended by
    telephone






    All meeting fees are paid in cash



 


 



    Annual Stock Option Award






    Each year, all non-employee directors receive options to acquire
    7,500 shares of the Company’s stock pursuant to the
    2004 Incentive Plan. The option grant occurs on the date of each
    annual meeting of the Company’s stockholders, and the
    exercise price is equal to the closing market price on such day.



 




    Named
    Executive Officer Compensation Summary



 



    Current salaries for named executive officers (rounded to
    nearest $1,000):



 


	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
    Name
	
 
	
 
	
    Title
	
 
	
    Salary
	
 

	

    Sam Ferrise


	
 
	
 
	
    President — Baldwin Filters, Inc.
	
 
	
    $
	
    346,000
	
 

	

    Norman Johnson


	
 
	
 
	
    Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
	
 
	
    $
	
    725,000
	
 

	

    Bruce Klein


	
 
	
 
	
    Vice President — Finance & Chief Financial Officer
	
 
	
    $
	
    321,000
	
 

	

    David Lindsay


	
 
	
 
	
    Vice President — Administration & Chief
    Administrative Officer
	
 
	
    $
	
    193,000
	
 

	

    Richard Wolfson


	
 
	
 
	
    Vice President — General Counsel & Corporate
    Secretary
	
 
	
    $
	
    250,000
	
 









 



    The named executive officers of the Company are eligible to
    receive bonuses as determined in the discretion of the
    Compensation Committee. Such bonuses would be paid in 2009 and
    would be based on the achievement by the Company of certain
    objective targets related to the Company’s net income and
    economic value-added returns during fiscal year 2008.



 



    The named executive officers may also receive stock options and
    restricted stock pursuant to the Company’s
    stockholder-approved 2004 Incentive Plan as determined in the
    discretion of the Compensation Committee.



 




    Additional
    Information



 



    The foregoing information is summary in nature. Additional
    information regarding director and named executive officer
    compensation will be provided in the Company’s Proxy
    Statement to be filed in connection with the Company’s
    Annual Meeting of Stockholders, currently anticipated to be held
    on March 31, 2008.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. John BOUDREAUX, Willie Boudreaux.

No. 61344.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 12, 1978.

In re: John Boudreaux and Willie Bou-dreaux applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs. Jefferson Parish.

Writ granted. The defendant is entitled to call witnesses at the pre-trial preliminary hearing. La C.Cr.P. art. 294,

SANDERS, C. J., and SUMMERS, J., dissent from the granting of the writ.
Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2016-0183 ☐ These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2015-SW-016-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: ☒ FRAN ☐ SNPRM

☒ No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? 

If yes, list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the

previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point 

for guidance. 

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following:

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested?

Why is the change requested or how is it justified?

Do we agree?

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following 

changes to the AD:

If NO, we don’t agree because

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following:

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested?

Why is the change requested or how is it justified?

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following 

changes to the AD:

Page 1 of 3
If NO, we don’t agree because

For additional issues, double-click here

Page 2 of 3
Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date

Page 3 of 3
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6525

BARTHOLOMEW ROBINSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District

Judge. (CA-01-701-2)

Submitted: June 20, 2002 Decided: June 27, 2002

Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bartholomew Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Bain Smith,

Assistant Attorney General, Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant

Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Bartholomew Robinson seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254

(West 1994 & Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the

district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the

magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. See Robinson v. Angelone, No. CA01-701-2 (E.D. Va. Mar. 20, 2002). 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
#### Paul Nicholas GAGNON, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 40809.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 30, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 243 So.2d 219.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and CARLTON, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1230 PLATE 7
EXPLANATION
3 ’ ——
Canal
ve? Water on surface _—— Ss
< Droit oe
rain &
°
% , S
Water aS than 2 feet @bgardatenshee)
A | 4020 1919 it
. Water 2 to 4 feet ae
== HBF oes 3
RUS My Water over 4 feet Water-table contours in feet above
eS 2 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation datum
DAR # Contour interval 2 feet
2
° ee rae 2
e Wa] oo
<S S ye
Xe 3 a e. ,
© aXe
Z (° . i. Rss NG
N
Re L
* ae - g
& Lo) 2 Miles
L 1 l 1 j
Base from maps prepared by U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
MAP OF RINCON VALLEY, NEW MEXICO, SHOWING WATER-TABLE CONTOURS a ae ek
AND DEPTH TO WATER IN SUMMER OF 1919 AND 1926
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.24

                             CERTIFICATE OF TRUST OF
                               RADIO ONE TRUST II

          THIS CERTIFICATE OF TRUST of Radio One Trust II (the "Trust"), dated
as of January 18, 2002, is being duly executed and filed on behalf of the Trust
by the undersigned, as trustee, to form a business trust under the Delaware
Business Trust Act (12 Del. C. (S) 3801 et seq.) (the "Act").

          1. Name. The name of the business trust formed by this Certificate of
Trust is Radio One Trust II.


          2. Delaware Trustee. The name and business address of the trustee of
the Trust in the State of Delaware are: Wilmington Trust Company, Rodney Square
North, 1100 North Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19890-0001, Attention:
Corporate Trust Administration.


          3. Effective Date. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective upon
filing.

          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate
of Trust in accordance with Section 3811(a)(1) of the Act.

                                             WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY, not in
                                             its individual capacity but solely
                                             as Trustee


                                             By: /s/ Patricia A. Evans
                                                ---------------------------
                                                Name:  Patricia A. Evans
                                                Title: Senior Financial Services
                                                       Officer
#### James D. CONNER, Appellant, v. The SOUTHLAND CORPORATION, a Texas corporation; Cook-Quik, Inc., a Florida corporation; Herman Sausage Company, Inc., a Florida corporation; Velda Dairy Farms, Inc., a Florida corporation; Robert H. Houck; Victor H. Vermeulen; Richard W. Pinson; and Woodrow Montgomery, Appellees.

No. 69-335.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 4, 1969.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Brevard County, dismissed as to Appellee-Victor H. Vermeulen only.

Appeal dismissed.
Case 4:05-cv-02167-JEJ Document 6 Filed 12/05/05 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 3.7

                     AMENDMENT OF ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION

                                       OF

                    THE SOURCE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT COMPANY



HONORABLE MATT BLUNT
SECRETARY OF STATE
STATE OF MISSOURI
JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI  65101

         Pursuant to the provisions of The General and Business Corporation Law
of Missouri, the undersigned Corporation certifies the following:

                                    SECTION 1

         The present name of the Corporation is The Source Information
Management Company, which is the name under which it was originally organized.


                                    SECTION 2

         An amendment to the Corporation's Articles of Incorporation was adopted
by the shareholders on November 19, 2001.


                                    SECTION 3

         Article One of the Articles of Incorporation is amended to read as
follows:

        The name of the Corporation is: Source Interlink Companies, Inc.


                                    SECTION 4

         All of the 18,231,299 shares of common stock outstanding were entitled
to vote on the foregoing amendment; all 14,823,023 shares voted for said
amendment, and 25,077 shares voted against said amendment.

                                    SECTION 5

         The Amendment did not change the number or par value of authorized
shares having a par value.


                                    SECTION 6

         The Amendment did not provide for any exchange, reclassification, or
cancellation of issued shares, or a reduction of the number of authorized shares
of any class below the value of issued shares of that class.




<PAGE>



         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, Chairman and CEO, has executed
this instrument and its Secretary has affixed its corporate seal hereto and
attested said seal on the 27th day of November, 2001.

(a)      The Source Information Management Company



(Corporate Seal)                            By: /s/ S. Leslie Flegel
                                                 -------------------
                                                     Chairman and CEO

Attest:


/s/ W. Brian Rodgers
Secretary



STATE OF MISSOURI          )
                                    )SS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS          )

         I, Shannon P. Kister, a Notary Public, do hereby certify that on the
27th day of November, 2001 personally appeared before me S. Leslie Flegel who,
being by me first duly sworn, declared that he is the Chairman and CEO of the
Corporation, that he signed the foregoing document as Chairman and CEO of the
Corporation, and that the statements therein contained are true.


                                                     /s/ Shannon P. Kister
                                                              Notary Public

My commission expires:  January 20, 2002
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

RICHARD C. CURRAN, : Case No.: 4:04cv2526

Plaintiff : Judge Jones

:

v :

:

MILLERSTOWN BOROUGH, et al.,:

Defendants :

ORDER

September 1, 2005

THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:

Stanley J. Brassington, Esq. (“Brassington”), counsel for Plaintiff, Richard

C. Curran (“Plaintiff”) has filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel (doc. 13) in this

matter. Brassington indicates therein that the Plaintiff has not cooperated with him,

in particular as to certain discovery requests. Although Brassington does not

reference this fact, the Court is aware that there are pending criminal homicide

charges lodged against Plaintiff which have resulted in his incarceration. Because of

Plaintiff’s status, we will not proceed in our customary fashion, which would be to

schedule a hearing in order to allow Plaintiff to be heard in person with respect to

Brassington’s desire to withdraw as his counsel. To do so would be impractical,

and in addition would create a burden upon law enforcement given the nature of the

charges against Plaintiff. We will, however, allow Plaintiff to respond in writing to

Case 4:04-cv-02526-JEJ Document 15 Filed 09/01/05 Page 1 of 2
Brassington’s Motion. If Plaintiff fails to oppose the Motion, or in the event that

any objections raised by him are without merit, Brassington shall be permitted to

withdraw as Plaintiff’s counsel. 

ACCORDINGLY, WE ENTER THE FOLLOWING ORDER:

1. Plaintiff Richard C. Curran’s counsel of record Stanley J. Brassington,

Esquire, shall forthwith serve a copy of the Motion to Withdraw as

Counsel together with this Order upon Plaintiff at his place of

incarceration, and shall file proof of service or otherwise confirm

receipt by Plaintiff on the docket. 

2. Plaintiff shall be provided 20 days from his receipt of the Motion and

Order to file any written opposition to the Motion with the Clerk of

this Court. 

3. Should Plaintiff fail to oppose the Motion, or in the event that any

objections raised by him to Brassington’s withdrawal are without

merit, the Motion shall be granted.

s/ John E. Jones III

John E. Jones III

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-02526-JEJ Document 15 Filed 09/01/05 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2731 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2731

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the deduction 
   for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 6, 2023

 Mr. Brown (for himself, Mr. Casey, Ms. Smith, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Van 
 Hollen, Mr. Murphy, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Menendez, and Mr. 
King) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 
                      to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the deduction 
   for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers.

    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 ``Educators Expense Deduction 
Modernization Act of 2023''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE IN DEDUCTION FOR CERTAIN EXPENSES OF ELEMENTARY AND 
              SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS.

    (a) In General.--Section 62(a)(2)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 is amended--
            (1) by striking ``elementary and secondary school 
        teachers'' in the heading and inserting ``eligible educators'', 
        and
            (2) by striking ``$250'' and inserting ``$1,000''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 62(d)(3) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
            (1) by striking ``2015'' and inserting ``2023'',
            (2) by striking ``$250'' and inserting ``$1,000'', and
            (3) by striking ``calendar year 2014'' and inserting 
        ``calendar year 2022''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to taxable years beginning December 31, 2022.
                                 <all>
```
#### Ex parte STATE of Alabama ex rel. ATTORNEY GENERAL.

77-490.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

May 19, 1978.

BLOODWORTH, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and FAULKNER, AL-MON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.