alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

OCT 13 1998

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

SAMUEL J. WILDER,

Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 98-5120

v. (N.D. Oklahoma)

SALVATION ARMY, sued as: The

Salvation Army (dormitory supervisor

Buddy Campbell) - Buddy Campbell,

Defendant - Appellee.

(D.C. No. 97-CV-93-B) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before ANDERSON, McKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore

ordered submitted without oral argument.
-2-

This case is before us on Samuel Wilder’s motion for leave to proceed

without prepayment of costs or fees in order to appeal the dismissal of his action

against the Salvation Army and others in which he alleges that his civil rights

were violated because the defendant defamed him, withheld some personal

effects, and violated the RICO statute. This matter has been before us once

before without success in Appeal No. 97-5227.

In addition to the claims referred to above, Mr. Wilder claims various

errors with respect to his motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), failure to

appoint counsel, failure to consolidate with another action, failure to stay the

proceedings, failure to permit discovery, and so on.

Substantially for the reasons set forth in the orders of the district court filed

March 24, 1998, and June 12, 1998, and based upon our own review of the file,

we conclude that this action and appeal are frivolous. Accordingly, Mr. Wilder’s

motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, all pending motions are denied,

and this appeal is DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Stephen H. Anderson

Circuit Judge
Webinar Attendees: Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Public Meeting & Availability of the Framework Document for Refrigerated Beverage Vending MachinesMeeting Date: Thursday, June 20, 2013Name Title Organization Street CityStateZip Phone FaxBouyelas, Steven N/AN/A225 Apple St.Norco LA 70079 N/AN/AGouw, SeanEngineerRefrigeration & ThermalTest Center (RTTC)Southern California EdisonAn EDISON INTERNATIONALCompany6060 N. Irwindale AvenueSuite NIrwindaleCA91702626-812-7650626-812-7599Jenkins, James N/AN/A3020 1st Ave ENewton IA 50208 N/AN/ALau, Christopher ConsultantNavigant Consulting, Inc.1200 19th Street, NWWashingtonDC20036202-481-7524202-973-2401.Layseca-Flores, Erick N/AWellington Drive Technologies PO Box 57San Juan Rio N/A 76800 N/AN/ANicholson, Laura N/AN/A1604 Coolidge Avenue Pasadena CA 91104 N/AN/APowell, Patrick N/AUnderwriters Laboratories801 Klein Rd Suite 200 Plano TX 75074 N/AN/ASieben, Susan N/AN/APO Box 4929Buffalo Grove IL 60089 N/AN/AWaltner, Meg Energy EfficiencyAdvocateNatural Resources Defense Council(NRDC)1152 15th Street, NWSuite 300WashingtonDC20005202-513-6270202-289-1060.Wilson, Linda Environmental Scientist New York State Office of the AttorneyGeneral120 BroadwayNew YorkNY10271212-416-8948212-416-6007.Zakarian, Arshak N/AN/A1610 Harrison St. Oakland CA 94612 N/AN/AZehr, ErickEngineering Associate UL - Springboard3020 1st Ave ENewton IA 50208 N/AN/A
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel Loan Repayment Program Review.                    

*Date:*                         April 30, 2012.                    

*Time:*                         9 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         JoAnn McConnell, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, NINDS/NIH/DHHS/Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3208, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-5324,                          *mcconnej@ninds.nih.gov*.                      

                        (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the                               ( print page 15113)                            Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS)                    

Dated: March 8, 2012.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2012-6161 Filed 3-13-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### Betty L. TURNER, et al. v. BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON, et al.

No. 86-C-2320.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 9, 1987.

In re Turner, Betty L.; Turner, Chris; Turner, Jane; Turner, Terry; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 85-1051; Parish of Avoyelles, 12th Judicial District Court, Div. “B”, No. 81-1126.

Prior report: La.App., 495 So.2d 986.

Denied.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2281 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on TMP Diallyl Ether. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. BROWN (for himself and Mr. VOINOVICH) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on TMP Diallyl 

Ether. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. TMP DIALLYL ETHER. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.24.01 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 TMP Diallyl Ether) is amended by striking the date in 

7 the effective column period and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2281 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2294 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2294

 To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on Boltom H20, H30, H40, 
                                 H2085.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

  Mr. Brown (for himself and Mr. Voinovich) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on Boltom H20, H30, H40, 
                                 H2085.

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

SECTION 1. BOLTOM H20, H30, H40, H2085.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.94 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Boltom H20, H30, H40, H2085) 
is amended by striking the date in the effective column period and 
inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT KATHERINE A. BERG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. 96-2309 FAIRFAX COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-96-886-A) Submitted: December 10, 1996 Decided: January 2, 1997 Before ERVIN and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Katherine A. Berg, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas John Cawley, John Francis Cafferky, HUNTON & WILLIAMS, McLean, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION PER CURIAM: Katherine Berg appeals from the district court's order grantingDefendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissing her complaint filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district court's order and find no reversible error. Berg's prior sworn testimony before the Workers' Compensation Commission and her submission of notes and certifications from her treating physiciansconclusively established that she could not perform the essential functions of her position, thus rendering her "unqualified" for the positionunder the ADA. 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8) (1994); Southeastern Community College v. Davis , 442 U.S. 397, 406 (1979); Myers v. Hose , 50 F.3d 278, 281-82 (4th Cir. 1995); Tyndall v. National Educ. Ctrs. , 31 F.3d 209, 212-13 (4th Cir. 1994); August v. Offices Unlimited, Inc. , 981 F.2d 576, 581-83 (1st Cir. 1992). We further find that the district court correctly found that the accommodations requested by Berg were unreasonable.* See Myers , 50 F.3d at 284; Milton v. Scrivner, Inc. , 53 F.3d 1118, 1124-25 (10th Cir. 1995); Gilbert v. Frank , 949 F.2d 637, 644 (2d Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm the order of the district court. Berg v. Fairfax County Pub. Schs. , No. CA-96-886-A (E.D. Va. Aug. 21, 1996). We dispense with oral argument b ecausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED

_________________________________________________________________ *Berg requested that she either be reassigned to another position, or that others perform the tasks she could not. 2
# L_2006080EN.01004201.xml

| 17.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 80/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 80/42

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 447/2006

of 16 March 2006

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar to certain third countries for the 21st partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1138/2005

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1) and in particular the second indent of Article 27(5) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1138/2005 of 15 July 2005 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for the 2005/2006 marketing year, requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar to certain third countries. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1138/2005 of 15 July 2005 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for the 2005/2006 marketing year, requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar to certain third countries.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1138/2005 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the case may be, account being taken in particular of the state and foreseeable development of the Community and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender in question. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1138/2005 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the case may be, account being taken in particular of the state and foreseeable development of the Community and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender in question.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 21st partial invitation to tender for white sugar issued pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1138/2005 the maximum amount of the export refund shall be 29,800 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 March 2006.

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

Done at Brussels, 16 March 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 178, 30.6.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 39/2004 (OJ L 6, 10.1.2004, p. 16).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 185, 16.7.2005, p. 3.

2

---
#### UNITED STATES v. BALDY.

No. 9241.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Dec. 22, 1939.

MATHEWS, Circuit Judge, dissenting.

Samuel O’Clark, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Sewall Key and James P. Garland, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., and Carl C. Donaugh, U. S. Atty., and J. Mason Dillard, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Portland, Or., for appellant.

Robt. T. Jacob and Ashley Greene, both of Portland, Or., for appellee.

Before DENMAN, MATHEWS, and HEALY, Circuit Judges.

HEALY, Circuit Judge.

Appellee had judgment in a suit to obtain a refund of a tax exacted under § 213 of the National Industrial Recovery Act (48 Stat. 206), and the Government appeals.1 The statute, § 213(a), imposed an excise tax of 5% upon the receipt of corporate dividends, the tax to be withheld at the source. Dividends declared before the date of the enactment of the statute (June 16, 1933), although paid after that date, were exempted from the tax.

The findings are that on April 15, 1933 appellee’s board of directors adopted a resolution reading as follows: “Mr. Gibbs then moved and Mr. Southern seconded the motion that a July dividend be declared at the rate of 200 per share on the Preferred Stock; 150 per share on the Class ‘B’ Fully Participating Preference stock and 150 per share on the Common stock, with authority for the president to make a reduction in the rate if in his discretion it is deemed advisable.”

The full amount of the dividend was paid on July 1, 1933. At the time of the adoption of the resolution the corporation was solvent and a sufficient earned surplus existed out of which to pay the dividend. The requisite amount was then available and remained available at all times thereafter until paid.

The trial court concluded as a matter of law that the resolution was a valid declaration of a dividend and created a debtor-creditor relationship between the corporation and its stockholders. The case is controlled by our decision in Maloney v. Western Cooperage Co., 9 Cir., 103 F.2d 992,2 handed down after the entry of judgment below, and the judgment must be reversed. A declaration of dividend which does not create a definite, irrevocable and enforceable debt against the corporation in favor of the stockholders is not a fully declared dividend. There was here no *592definite and irrevocable debt, ascertainable as of the effective date of the National Industrial Recovery Act. At that time the payment of the dividend was subject to the discretionary authority of the appellee’s president to make any reduction in the rate of dividend he might deem advisable.

Reversed.

MATHEWS, Circuit Judge, dissents.

1

 Appellee has moved to dismiss the appeal, or in the alternative to affirm the judgment, because of an alleged failure of appellant to comply with our Rule 20 relating to specifications of error in briefs. Appellant’s brief, however, amply specifies the error relied on.

2

 See also United States v. Southwestern Portland Cement Co., 9 Cir., 97 F. 2d 413.
**BANKGREENVILLE            FINANCIAL CORPORATION**

**Exhibit            32     Section 1350 Certifications             **

CERTIFICATION            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT            TO            SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the            Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of BankGreenville Financial            Corporation (the “Company”), each certify that, to his or her knowledge on            the date of this certification:

1.   The            quarterly report of the Company for the period endedSeptember30, 2007 as filed with the Securities            and Exchange Commission on this date (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 result of operations of the Company.

Date:     November13,            2007                                                 By:    /s/            Russell T. Williams___

                                                                                                                       Russel T. Williams                                                                                                                        Chief Executive Officer

Date:     November13,            2007                                                By:    /s/ Paula            S. King                  

                                                                                                                    Paula S.            King

                                                                                                            Chief Financial Officer
#### James Council, Plaintiff in Error, vs. Fred A. Lewter, Defendant in Error.

(Supreme Court of Florida, Division A,

July 11, 1905.)

Writ of Error to Circuit Court, Orange County; Minor S. Jones, Judge.

*Massey & Warlow,*for Plaintiff in Error.

*Jones & Jones,*for Defendant in Error.

Decision

Per Curiam.

This action was brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. There was judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant takes writ of error. The judgment is affirmed.
#### STATE ex rel. Mitchell MOORE v. Rudolph F. BECKER, III, Judge, Orleans Criminal District Court, Sec. E, et al.

No. 87-KH-2127.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 13, 1987.

In re Moore, Mitchell; applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs, writ of mandamus; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “E”.

Granted. The order of the federal district court for the Eastern District of Louisiana indicates that the state’s motion to remand for resentencing before a judge other than the judge who imposed petitioner’s sentence was granted. As a matter of comity between the federal and state courts, we order relator be resentenced within 60 days before the state judge who has now been allotted this case.
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT
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 The Cavalier Group
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended February 29, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Periodic
Report), I, Gerald W. Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|1. | the Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

Date: April 4, 2008

/s/ Gerald W. Williams

Gerald W. Williams Chief Financial Officer

---