alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 1 Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases

on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless

expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession."

Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion

should not be published. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

for the Fifth Circuit

_____________________________________

No. 95-10244

Summary Calendar

_____________________________________

MELVIN JOSHUA DELANEY

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

SHAWN KELM, Lt

Defendant-Appellee.

______________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:94 CV 1230 AH)

______________________________________________________ July 31, 1995

Before DUHÉ, WIENER and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 1

Appellant Delaney, a Texas state prisoner, sued Deputy Sheriff

Kelm under § 1983 alleging use of excessive force. The parties

agreed to trial by a magistrate judge who granted summary judgment

for Defendant. We affirm.

In the order of reference the district court recited that any

appeal from the judgment rendered by the magistrate judge would lie

in the district court. This was error. It is the agreement of the2

parties which governs. Oliver v. Collins , 904 F.2d 278, 280 (5th

Cir. 1990), 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). The parties did not agree to

appeal to the district court so the general rule applies and appeal

to this court is correct.

Appellant contends that it was error for the court to grant

summary judgment because he did not have an opportunity to respond

to it. Seven months after the suit was filed, Defendant moved for

summary judgment. About three weeks later the judge ruled and

granted the motion. The following day Appellant asked for more

time to respond which request was denied as untimely. Appellant

was entitled to ten days to respond to the motion under Rule 56(c).

He was afforded more than that. We find no abuse of discretion.

The record amply supports the summa ry judgment. Defendant

submitted aff idavits fully documenting the use of force incident

w hich make it clear that the force was not excessive and was

necessary. Appellant submitted nothing in opposition. He claims

in this Court, by way of a motion to supplement the record, that he

was precluded from submitting information from the in firmary

records because the rules of the Northe rn District prohibit the

filing into the record of the results of discovery. We deny his

motion, however, because the rules, while they do not permit the

routine filing of discovery matter, specifica lly provide for the

filing into the record of matter discovered which is relied upon in

opposition to a motion for summary judgment. We note in passing

that the material, even if considered, goes to the severity of the

alleged injury and not to the reasonableness or necessity of the3

force. This record makes clear that the force was applied in a

good faith effort to restore discipline and not maliciously or

sadistically to cause harm. Hudson v. McMillian , 503 U.S. 1, 6-7

(1992).

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**     I, Mary Mikkelson, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Tronox Incorporated;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;  (c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on our evaluation; and  (d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors: (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.   /s/ Mary Mikkelson   Mary Mikkelson  Chief Financial Officer  August 7, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 12336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4763]


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

PEACE CORPS


Public Availability of Office of Acquisitions and Contract 
Management FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory

AGENCY: United States Peace Corps.

ACTION: Notice of public availability of FY 2011 Service Contract 
Inventories.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-117), the Office 
of Acquisitions and Contract Management is publishing this notice to 
advise the public of the availability of the FY 2011 Service Contract 
inventory and FY2010 Analysis Report. This inventory provides 
information on service contract actions over $25,000 that were made in 
FY 2011. The information is organized by function to show how 
contracted resources are distributed throughout the agency. The 
inventory has been developed in accordance with guidance issued on 
November 5, 2010 by the Office of Management and Budget's Office of 
Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). OFPP's guidance is available at 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/procurement/memo/service-contract-inventories-guidance-11052010.pdf. The Office of 
Acquisitions and Contract Management has posted its inventory and a 
summary of the inventory on the Peace Corps homepage at the following 
link: http://www.peacecorps.gov/open/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding the service 
contract inventory should be directed to Sandra R. Harrell in the 
Office of Acquisitions and Contract Management at 202-692-1107 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8af9e2ebf8f8efe6e6cafaefebe9efe9e5f8faf9a4ede5fc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e6958e879494838a8aa696838785838589949695c8818990">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: February 21, 2012.
Sandra R. Harrell,
Chief of Procurement Policy, Office of Acquisitions and Contract 
Management.
[FR Doc. 2012-4763 Filed 2-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6015-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Letter Agreement



 Exhibit 10.2 
 [Company letterhead] 
 December 21, 2006 
 Via Hand Delivery 
 David Tierney 
  

	 	Re:	Change in Control Payment 

 Dear David: 
 Reference is made to Sections 6.5(b) and 6.6(b)of your Amended and Restated Employment Agreement entered into on July 5, 2006 (the “Employment
Agreement”) pursuant to which you are entitled to receive a lump sum payment equal to the sum of (i) 24 months of your then current Base Salary and (ii) 2 times the highest Annual Bonus you received during the 3 most recently
completed fiscal years of the Company (hereinafter referred to as the “Change in Control Payment”), in the event you are terminated by the Company without “Cause” or if you resign for “Good Reason” during the period
commencing on the 30th day immediately preceding a “Change in Control” and ending on the first anniversary
of the Change in Control. The purpose of this letter is to memorialize your agreement with the Company, as authorized by the Compensation Committee of our Board, to vary the application of Sections 6.5(b) and 6.6(b) of your Employment Agreement.
Except as otherwise noted herein, capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meaning as is set forth in your Employment Agreement. 
 Specifically, your right to receive the Change in Control Payment will be triggered solely upon the occurrence of a Change in Control, and you will no longer be required to experience a termination of employment as an additional condition
to trigger such payment. 
 The changes to your Employment Agreement, as described herein, are being made pursuant to and in accordance with
the new rules governing non-qualified deferred compensation as promulgated under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Specifically, certain transition relief provided under the proposed
regulations to Section 409A of the Code permits modifications to be made to the timing and form of certain payments subject to Section 409A of the Code (i.e., the Change in Control Payment) during calendar year 2006, to the extent the time
and form of such payments are payable, but for the modification, after calendar year 2006. 
 Except as otherwise expressly modified under
this letter, all other terms and conditions of your Employment Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 







 This letter merges and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous discussions, agreements and
understandings of every nature regarding the Change in Control Payment and may not be changed or modified, except by an agreement in writing signed by you and an authorized representative of the Company. 
 Intended to be legally bound, please acknowledge that this letter reflects our agreement by signing in the space provided below and returning the
original to me. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	 /s/ Andrew T. Drechsler

	Name: Andrew T. Drechsler
	Title:   Chief Financial Officer


 Acknowledged and agreed on this 21st day of December, 2006: 
  

	
	 /s/ David Tierney

	David Tierney
Process Description 

~
Exhibit 32.1

NTELOS HOLDINGS CORP.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of NTELOS HOLDINGS CORP. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2008 (the Report), I, James S. Quarforth, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
to my knowledge that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.



By:

/s/ James S. QuarforthJames S. QuarforthChief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board of Directors


November 6, 2008
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 24

- 00108

- CV

In re Toni Van Gompel

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied , and the motion for temporary re lief

is dismissed as moot

. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

_______________________ ___________________ Darlene Byrne

, Chief Justice

Before C hief Justice Byrne, Justices Smith and Theofanis

Filed: February 23, 2024
**Exhibit      32**

**Certification      of Periodic Financial Report**

**Pursuant      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

|                                               |                                                     |                                                    |
|----------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|                                               |                                                     |
| Date:                August                4, 2007 | By:                                            | /s/ Norman                B.                Osborn |
|                                               | Norman B. OsbornChief Executive                  Officer |

|                                               |                                                          |                                     |
|----------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                                               |                                                          |
| Date:                August                4, 2007 | By:                                                 | /s/ Dora                Kicklighter |
|                                               | Dora KicklighterPrincipal Accounting                  Officer |

----
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (1.05 MB)

Tags:Town Hall, Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Joint Reserve Forces, Department of Defense, DLA Troop Support, Defense Logistics Agency, DOD, IMA, DLA, Troop Support

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined th a t

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 97-11408 Summary Calendar

ALICIA ALFARO; IRMA I. CASTILLO; ESPERANZA CRUZ; ENEDINA GONZALEZ; DIANA GARCIA; ADELA HERNANDEZ; MARIA LEDEZMA; TOMACITA MARTINEZ; ALMA OROPEZA; LUCIA OSORIO; CATALINA PEREZ; OFELIA SOLIS; MARIA VENEGAS,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

VERSUS

THE LEATHER CENTER, INCORPORATED,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas

(3:97-CV-326-X)

September 25, 1998 Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Alicia Alfaro and others sued their employer, The Leather

Center, in state court alle ging that their employer failed to

furnish them a safe place to work and, as a non-subscriber to the

Texas Workers ’ Compensation Law, was liable to them under state

common law negligence theories. The Leather Center removed the2

case to the federal district court alleging that there was a

Collective Bargaining Agreement between The Leather Center and the

U nion which represented these employees and that these employees

had failed to exhaust the administrative remedies provided for

under the Collective Barg aining Agreement as remedies for their

complaints. Alfaro, et al. moved to remand to the state court and

the federal district court denied such motion. The Leather Center

moved for a summary judgment and Alfaro, et al. conceded that they

had not exhausted the administrative remedies under the Collective

Bargaining Agreement. The district court entered summary judgment

in favor of The Leather Center and Alfaro, et al. appealed only the

issue of whether or not the district court had correctly denied

their motion to remand to state court.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts and

relevant portions of the record itself. Based on that review, we

have concluded that t he district court did not commit reversible

error in denying the motion to remand.

AFFIRMED

.
##### 



/s/ David G. BannisterDavid G. BannisterDATED: February 25, 2008
 67




---



##### 



/s/ Ronald W. DruckerRonald W. DruckerDATED: February 25, 2008
 68




---



##### 



/s/ William S. ElstonWilliam S. ElstonDATED: February 25, 2008
 69




---



##### 



/s/ Diana M. MurphyDiana M. MurphyDATED: February 25, 2008
 70




---



##### 



/s/ Jeffrey C. CroweJeffrey C. CroweDATED: February 25, 2008
 71




---



##### 



/s/ Michael A. HenningMichael A. HenningDATED: February 25, 2008
 72
Certification Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
CERTIFICATIONS

I, Casey Forward, CEO, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F, as amended by this Form 20-F/A, of Globetech Ventures Corp.

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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The company'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)) for the company 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 company, 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 company'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 company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The company's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company's auditors and the audit committee of the company'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 company'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 company's internal control over financial reporting.



Date: November 28, 2005



Casey Forward

Chief Executive Officer
Slip Op. 20-82

UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

Before: Leo M. Gordon, Judge

Consol. Court No. 15-00103

JUDGMENT

This action having been submitted for decision, and the court, afte r due deliberation,

having rendered opinions; now in conformi ty with those opinions, it is hereby

ORDERED that the Final Results of Redetermi nation Pursuant to Court Remand,

ECF No. 95-1 (Second Remand Results), regar ding the final results of the fifth

administrative review of the antidumping duty order coveri ng steel wire garment hangers

from the People’s Republic of China, Steel Wire Garm ent Hangers from the PRC,

80 Fed. Reg. 13,332 (Dep’t of Co mmerce Mar. 13, 2015) (final results admin. rev.) and

the accompanying Issues and Decision Memora ndum for Steel Wire Garments from the

PRC, A–570–918, (Dep’t of Commerce Mar. 6, 2015), available at

https://enforcement.trade.gov/fr n/summary/prc/2015-05828-1.pdf (l ast visited this date),

are sustained; and it is further SHANGHAI WELLS HANGER CO., LTD., HONG KONG WELLS LTD., HONG KONG WELLS LTD. (USA), FABRICLEAN SUPPLY, INC.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant.Consol. Court No. 15-00103 Page 2

ORDERED that the subject entries enjoined in th is action, see ECF No. 12 (order

granting motion for preliminary injunction), mu st be liquidated in accordance with the final

court decision, as provided in Se ction 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended,

19 U.S.C. § 1516a( e) (2012).

/s/ Leo M. Gordon Judge Leo M. Gordon

Dated: June 11, 2020 New York, New York