alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RAYMOND ARTHUR GENTILE,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

U.S. FEDERAL MARSHAL,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 18

- 16590

D.C. No. 1:15

- cv

- 00943

- DAD

- EPG

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 17, 2019 **

Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Federal prisoner Raymond Arthur Gentile appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown

Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971), alleging

deliberate indif

ference to his serious medical needs . We have jurisdiction under 28

* This disposition is not appropriat e for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

APR 23 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

.

Wilhelm v. Rotman , 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012) . We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Gentile’ s action because Gentile failed

to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible deliberate indifference claim against a

proper defendant

. See FDIC v. Meyer

, 510 U.S. 471, 4 72 (1994) (federal agencies

are not proper defendants in a Bivens action)

.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying further leave to file

an amended co mplaint because amendment would be futile. See Cervantes v.

Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. , 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011) (setting forth

standard of review and explaining that district court may deny leave to amend

where amendment would be futile ).

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                     1,938,081
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                           1,196,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                   0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                3,126,560
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       180,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         180,000
<LOANS>                                   51,130,302
<ALLOWANCE>                                  615,121
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            60,114,464
<DEPOSITS>                                53,163,214
<SHORT-TERM>                                       0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                        1,294,834
<LONG-TERM>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                       2,400
<OTHER-SE>                                 5,140,247
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>            60,114,464
<INTEREST-LOAN>                            1,157,242
<INTEREST-INVEST>                             47,756
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               7,557
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                           1,212,555
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           605,504
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           640,195
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        572,360
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                 52,572
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              532,999
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               76,108
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    76,108
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                  76,108
<EPS-BASIC>                                   0.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0.32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                  4.32
<LOANS-NON>                                  235,638
<LOANS-PAST>                                       0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              756,158
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             561,944
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  3,963
<RECOVERIES>                                   4,568
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            615,121
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         479,414
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      135,707


</TABLE>
# L_2005280EN.01000601.xml

| 25.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 280/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 280/6

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1744/2005

of 24 October 2005

amending Commission Regulation (EC) No 1168/2005 opening a standing invitation to tender for the resale on the Community market of maize held by the Austrian intervention agency

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1168/2005 (2) opened a standing invitation to tender for the resale on the Community market of maize held by the Austrian intervention agency. That invitation to tender expires on 26 October 2005, while the quantities made available under the Regulation have not been entirely used up. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1168/2005 (2) opened a standing invitation to tender for the resale on the Community market of maize held by the Austrian intervention agency. That invitation to tender expires on 26 October 2005, while the quantities made available under the Regulation have not been entirely used up.

| (2) | In order to guarantee livestock farmers and the livestock-feed industry supplies at competitive prices throughout the 2005/06 marketing year, the stocks of maize held by the Austrian intervention agency should continue to be made available on the cereal market. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In order to guarantee livestock farmers and the livestock-feed industry supplies at competitive prices throughout the 2005/06 marketing year, the stocks of maize held by the Austrian intervention agency should continue to be made available on the cereal market.

| (3) | Regulation (EC) No 1168/2005 should be amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 1168/2005 should be amended accordingly.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In the third subparagraph of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1168/2005, the date ‘26 October 2005’ is replaced by ‘28 June 2006’.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 October 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 188, 20.7.2005, p. 16. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1496/2005 (OJ L 240, 16.9.2005, p. 37).

2

---
Date,"LT COMPOSITE (>10 Yrs)","TREASURY 20-Yr CMT"
02/23/2024,4.49,4.51
02/22/2024,4.57,4.58
02/21/2024,4.59,4.59
02/20/2024,4.54,4.56
02/16/2024,4.55,4.58
02/15/2024,4.51,4.54
02/14/2024,4.54,4.57
02/13/2024,4.57,4.59
02/12/2024,4.46,4.48
02/09/2024,4.46,4.48
02/08/2024,4.45,4.47
02/07/2024,4.39,4.41
02/06/2024,4.37,4.39
02/05/2024,4.44,4.46
02/02/2024,4.31,4.33
02/01/2024,4.18,4.21
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ARTHUR BRAIN B. HEATH,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 181 EAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ARTHUR BRAIN B. HEATH,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 182 EAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 12th day of November, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
#### Louis Lee LOAFT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-490.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 29, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 8:58 AM

To: 'Ben@tjaviation.net'

Cc: '333exemptions@faa.gov'

Subject: Request for Additional Information: TJ Aviation Drones (FAA-2015-0903)

June 4, 2015 

Dear Mr. Omensky: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2015-0903). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your 

petition. 

 Describe the aircraft make, model, and type (i.e. - fixed-wing, rotorcraft, lighter-than-air) for the 

proposed UAS operation. The description should include the maximum weight (including 

payload). This information can be located in the aircraft manual. 

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by 

Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to proceed without this manual and 

remove closed-set filming from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the 

requested response date listed below. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit 

any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to 

333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information 

described above by June 18, 2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without 

notifying you further. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels 

Program Analyst 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 58754]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28800]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in the Geosciences; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in the Geosciences (1569).
    Date & Time: November 17-19, 1997; 8:30 am-6:00 pm.
    Place: NSF-Arizona AMS Facility, Physics Bldg., University of 
Arizona, Tucson, AZ.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Persons: Russell Kelz, Division of Earth Sciences, 
National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. 
Telephone: (703) 306-1555 x7043.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals submitted to the 
Instrumentation and Facilities Program as part of the selection 
process for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: October 27, 1997.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-28800 Filed 10-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

The Board of Directors 

Sunrise Telecom Incorporated: 

 

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (File Nos. 333-61596,333-43270, 333-96689, 333-107471, and 333-115722) on Form S-8 of Sunrise Telecom Incorporated, of our report dated February 8, 2005 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Sunrise Telecom Incorporated and subsidiaries as of December 31,2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004, which report appears in the December 31,2004 annual report on Form 10-K of Sunrise Telecom Incorporated. 

 

/s/    KPMG LLP 

 

Mountain View, California

March 29, 2005
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of dot com Entertainment Group, Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,David Outhwaite, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best ofmy knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|   | (1)    | The Report fully complies with the    requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of    1934; and,                               |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                       |
|   | (2)    | The information contained in the Report    fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and    results of operations of the Company. |

/s/ David Outhwaite

David OuthwaiteChief Executive OfficerAugust 14, 2003

 

This certification is being furnished solely to accompany this Form 10-QSBpursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for purposes ofSection 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to beincorporated by reference into any filing of the Company unless suchincorporation is expressly referenced therein.
USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS

Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center

**Waterfowl Identification in the Central Flyway**

##       American Wigeon (Baldpate)    

----

**Male - Winter**
****

**Body:** Medium sized duck, 1 1/2 - 2 pounds, 18-20 inches     long. Pinkish brown back and sides. White belly. Crown white or buffy. Glossy     green eye-mask. Bill short, grayish blue with black tip and base. Feet grayish     blue.**Wings:** Greater and middle coverts form white shoulder.     Speculum glossy green shading to black. **Voice:***Whistle*     repeated in threes. **In Flight:** White belly. White wing-shoulder.     White head-crown and black rump evident.   

**Male - Fall**
****

 Ranging in appearance from mottled pinkish brown over back and sides to     blotchy near-winter coloration. Crown and eye-mask faintly evident. Bill,     feet and wings same as in winter.   

**Female - All Seasons**
****

**Body:** Mottled brown. Distinct white belly. Head grayish     with dark speckles. Short grayish blue bill with dark tip. Feet grayish blue.     **Wings:** Lesser, middle and greater coverts brownish, edged     distinctively in white. Speculum dull greenish black. **Voice:***Qua-awk*.   

****

----

Previous Section
Return to Contents
Next Section

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior |		U.S. Geological Survey		URL: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/waterfwl/wigeon.htm		Page Contact Information: Webmaster		Page Last Modified: Thursday, 03-Aug-2006 11:32:16 EDT		Menlo Park, CA [caww54]
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 211 (Friday, October 31, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 58936]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28892]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-218; RM-9172]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Colchester, IL

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission requests comments on a petition filed by Gary 
G. Kidd proposing the allotment of Channel 244A at Colchester, 
Illinois, as the community's second local FM transmission service. 
Channel 244A can be allotted to Colchester in compliance with the 
Commission's minimum distance separation requirements with a site 
restriction 13.2 kilometers (8.2 miles) southwest to avoid a short-
spacing to the construction permit site of Station KRNQ(FM), Channel 
242C2, Keokuk, Iowa. The coordinates for Channel 244A at Colchester are 
North Latitude 40-21-48 and West Longitude 90-55-41.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before December 15, 1997, and reply 
comments on or before December 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In 
addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should 
serve the petitioner, his counsel, or consultant, as follows: Gary G. 
Kidd, 7 Northview Estates, Metropolis, Illinois 62960-2506 
(Petitioner).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon P. McDonald, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 97-218, adopted October 
15, 1997, and released October 24, 1997. The full text of this 
Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during 
normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M 
Street, NW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may 
also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20036.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contacts.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-28892 Filed 10-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### John R. BRODY, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 39483.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 6, 1970.

John R. Brody, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen. and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

CARLTON, Justice:

Petitioner filed in this Court a petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he *304complained about alleged infirmities supposedly tainting three separate convictions. One contention stood above the rest as requiring further consideration, namely, if he had been denied an appeal from a particular Rule 1.850, 33 F.S.A. denial because the Clerk of Circuit Court, Walton County, had failed to file and forward petitioner’s notice of appeal. The denial was handed down on July 23, 1969.

A letter of inquiry regarding this question was directed to the Circuit Court, but the answer was unsatisfactory, thus the State was ordered to file a return limited to this single issue. The return stated that the notice of appeal had been filed on August 26, 1969, but it was admitted that the notice had not been forwarded.

The State is correct in pointing out, however, that the notice was filed too late, the last timely day being August 22, 1969. Petitioner was on notice that a filing deadline existed and on August 4, 1969, he wrote to the Clerk of the Circuit Court inquiring about filing times. The Clerk advised petitioner to seek such information from the Public Defender who at that time was still on record as being petitioner’s counsel. Petitioner does not allege that he sought this information from the Public Defender, or that any answer from that official came too late for the perfecting of an appeal.

It being apparent that petitioner’s tardiness in filing was not the result of any State action, the writ heretofore issued must be discharged as improvidently issued.

It is so ordered.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
### COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED June 30, 2022

Sheila T. Reiff Clerk of Court of Appeals NOTICE

This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports.
A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See W IS
. S TAT . § 808.10 and R ULE 809.62.

Appeal No. 2021AP2220 Cir. Ct. No. 2021SC5936
STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT IV

B OARD OF R EGENTS OF THE U NIVERSITY OF W ISCONSIN ,

P LAINTIFF
- R ESPONDENT ,

V
.

R OBIN L AVANCE P ERKINS ,

D EFENDANT
- A PPELLANT
.

APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Dane County:

VALERIE BAILEY

- RIHN , Judge. Affirmed

.
¶ 1 FITZPATRICK, J. 1 Robin Perkins formerly leased an apartment from the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin ( “the Board”). The Board brought an action to evict Perkins from that apartment in small claims court in Dane County. I think that Perkins wants to appeal an order of the circuit court concerning

1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to W IS

. S TAT

. § 752.31(2 ) (a ) (20 19

- 20 ). All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2019

- 20 version unless otherwise noted.No. 2021AP2220

2 that eviction. But, Perkins’ notice of appeal and briefing in this court are such that it is impossible to determine what Perkins wants this court to do and the basis for

Perkin s’ request on appeal. Luckily, the Board’s response brief explains the events
in the circuit court, and I summarize those now.

¶ 2 The Board filed an eviction action to remove Perkins from a n apartment owned by the Board. Perkins did not appear at the eviction hearing, and a default judgment was entered against Pe rkins. Perkins filed two motions in the

circuit court that the court construed either as a motion to reopen the judgment or for relief from judgment under W IS

. S TAT

. § 806.07. Both motions were denied by

the circuit court.

¶ 3 I t is har d to tell anything about what Perkins request s as relief in this appeal. Perkins’ brief

- in

- chief and reply brief are a jumble of words with nothing that approaches a discernable argument. Wisconsin appellate courts grant some leniency to pro se litigants, like Perkins, in regard to briefing. Waushar a Cnty. v. Graf , 166 Wis. 2d 442, 452, 480 N.W.2d 16 (1992). However, a pro se litigant still has to make a recognizable argument as to why a decision of the circuit court should

be reversed. See id. Perkins has not done so in this appeal.

¶ 4 For those reason s Perkins’ appeal is rejected, and the order of the

circuit court is affirmed.

By the Court.

— Order affirmed

.

This opinion will not be published. See W IS

. S TAT

. R ULE 809.23(1)(b)4.