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

- 017 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________ No. 16

- 3 803

___________ IN RE: GERALD BUSH ,

Petitioner

____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to E .D. Pa. C iv

. Action No. 2

- 16

- cv
- 0 4022 )

____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

October 20, 2016
Before: AMBRO, GREENAWAY, JR. and SCIRICA, Cir cuit Judges

(Opinion filed : November 16, 2016 )

_________ OPINION *

_________ PER CURIAM
Gerald Bush , proceeding pro se , has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking review of an order of the United States District Court for th e Eastern District of Pennsylvania . For the reasons that follow, we will deny the mandamus petition.

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.2

Bush filed a c omplaint against Mercy Hospital and CTT Community Treatment Team claiming negligence in connection with medical care provided to his relat ive

. On August 1, 2016, t he District Court granted Bush’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The District Court explained that Bush had filed an earlier complaint raising the same cla ims ag ai n s t the
same defendants and that the complaint had been dismissed . Bush filed an appeal, which is pending in this Court. See C.A. No. 16

- 3348. In his mandamus petition, Bush presents issues related to the dismissal of his complaint . Bush raises whether the District Judge had a constitutional duty to determine if Mercy Hospital and CTT Community Treatment Team were negligent, and whether the District Judge monitored the defendants’ compliance with the disclos ure requirement s of
Federal Rule of Ci vil Procedure 26

. The writ of m andamus traditionally has been used “to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction or to compel it to exercise its authority when it is its duty to do so.” In re Patenaude , 210 F.3d 13 5, 140 (3d Cir. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted)

. A petitioner must show that he has no other adequate
means to attain the desired relief and that his right to the issuance of the writ is clear and indisputable

. Id. at 141.
B ush does not satisfy this standard

. His mandamus petition seeks review of the dismissal of his complaint against Mercy Hospital and CTT Community Treatment3

Team

. Because Bush can raise the issues presented in his appeal of the District Court’s
order , he has other adequate means to attain the desired relief. Accordingly, we will deny the petition for a writ of mandamus.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5092 

To conduct or support further comprehensive research for the creation of 

a universal influenza vaccine. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 26, 2018 

Ms. DELAURO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To conduct or support further comprehensive research for 

the creation of a universal influenza vaccine. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Flu Vaccine Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. RESEARCH FOR THE CREATION OF A UNIVERSAL 

6 INFLUENZA VACCINE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the National In8 stitute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases shall conduct or 

9 support comprehensive research for the creation of a uni10 versal influenza vaccine. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5092 IH

1 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—To carry 

2 out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated 

3 $200,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 2023. 

Æ 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

AMN Healthcare Services, Inc.

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 AMN Healthcare Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Susan R. Nowakowski, Chief Executive Officer and President 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 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.

Date: October 30, 2009



/s/    SUSAN R.
NOWAKOWSKISusan R. NowakowskiPresident and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

The following certification accompanies the issuer’squarterly report on Form 10-QSB and is not filed, as provided in Release33-8212.  34-47551 dated April 21, 2004.

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

Inconnection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of CoastBancorp for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, I, Jack C. Wauchope, ChiefExecutive Officer of Coast Bancorp, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002  that:

(1)            such quarterly report on Form 10-QSBof Coast Bancorp for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)           the information contained in suchquarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Coast Bancorp for the quarter ended March31, 2006, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of Coast Bancorp.

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Coast Bancorp and will be retained by Coast Bancorp and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Dated:  May15, 2007
|        | /s/ Jack C. Wauchope          |   |
|--------|-------------------------------|--------|
|   |                          |
|   | Jack C. Wauchope              |
|   | Chief Executive Officer       |
|   | (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

----
|   | (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 represents, the      financial condition and results of operations of the    Company. |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                          |   |   |   |   |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/      John      daCosta                    |   |   |   |   |
| John      daCostaChief      Financial Officer |   |   |   |   |
##### 



Exhibit 10.84




---



##### 



The parties have selected either the Oral Transaction Procedure or the
Written Transaction Procedure as indicated on the Base Contract.
 Oral Transaction Procedure:
  Written Transaction Procedure:
          Copyright © 2002 North American Energy Standards Board 
All Rights Reserved
    
    NAESB Standard X.X.X
January 28, 2002




---



##### 



Copyright© 2002 North American Energy Standards Board 
All Rights Reserved
    
    NAESB Standard X.X.X
January 28, 2002




---



##### 



The parties have selected either the Cover Standard or the Spot Price Standard as indicated on the Base Contract.
 Cover Standard:
  Spot Price Standard:
        Copyright© 2002 North American Energy Standards Board 
All Rights Reserved
    
    NAESB Standard X.X.X
January 28, 2002




---



##### 



The parties have selected either Buyer Pays At and After Delivery Point or
Seller Pays Before and At Delivery Point as indicated on the Base Contract.
 Buyer Pays At and After Delivery Point:
  Seller Pays Before and At Delivery Point:
            Copyright© 2002 North American Energy Standards Board 
All Rights Reserved
    
    NAESB Standard X.X.X
January 28, 2002




---



##### 



Copyright© 2002 North American Energy Standards Board 
All Rights Reserved
    
    NAESB Standard X.X.X
January 28, 2002




---



##### 



The parties have selected either Early Termination Damages Apply or Early
Termination Damages Do Not Apply as indicated on the Base Contract.
 Early Termination Damages Apply:
   Early Termination Damages Do Not Apply:
  The parties have selected either Other Agreement Setoffs Apply or Other
Agreement Setoffs Do Not Apply as indicated on the Base Contract.
 Other Agreement Setoffs Apply:
  Other Agreement Setoffs Do Not Apply:
    Copyright© 2002 North American Energy Standards Board 
All Rights Reserved
    
    NAESB Standard X.X.X
January 28, 2002




---



##### 



Copyright© 2002 North American Energy Standards Board 
All Rights Reserved
    
    NAESB Standard X.X.X
January 28, 2002




---



##### 



DISCLAIMER: NAESB DISCLAIMS AND EXCLUDES, AND ANY USER OF
THIS CONTRACT ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES TO NAESBS DISCLAIMER OF, ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, CONDITIONS
OR REPRESENTATIONS, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ORAL OR WRITTEN, WITH RESPECT TO THIS CONTRACT OR ANY PART
THEREOF, INCLUDING ANY AND ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT,
MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS OR SUITABILITY FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE (WHETHER OR NOT NAESB KNOWS,
HAS REASON TO KNOW, HAS BEEN ADVISED, OR IS OTHERWISE IN FACT AWARE OF ANY SUCH PURPOSE), WHETHER
ALLEGED TO ARISE BY LAW, BY REASON OF CUSTOM OR USAGE IN THE TRADE, OR BY COURSE OF DEALING. EACH
USER OF THIS CONTRACT ALSO AGREES THAT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL NAESB BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT,
SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF ANY USE OF THIS
CONTRACT.
 Copyright© 2002 North American Energy Standards Board 
All Rights Reserved
    
    NAESB Standard X.X.X
January 28, 2002
**AD Economic Evaluation**

Docket No . FAA - 2015 - 8695 Directorate ID : 2015 - SW - 042 - AD Helicopter Model: Agusta S.p.A. Model AB139 and AW139 Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 106 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions of this AD are intended to prevent separation of the mounting flange from the ice protection system tail rotor slip ring (slip ring) body and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ 56,806 for slip ring replac ement Labor per Helicopter ( 3 work hours X $85 for inspection) $ 255 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $255 for the inspection Total U . S . Fleet Cost $27,030 for the inspection Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities ? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Martin R. Crane
Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

ac1szo13 

Mr. Scott Davis 

Chief, Air Planning Branch 

U.S. EPA, Region 4 

61 Forsyth Street, S.W. 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104 

Environmental Protection Division • Air Protection Branch 

4244 International Parkway • Suite 120 • Atlanta • Georgia 30354 

404/363-7000 • Fax: 404/363-7100 

Judson H. Turner, Director 

RE: Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Rome, Georgia (Floyd County), 

Annual PM2.s Nonattainment Area 

Dear Mr. Davis: 

On June 21, 2012, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) submitted for approval 

and incorporation a proposed revision to Georgia's State Implementation Plan (SIP) to include a 

plan, consistent with §175A of the Clean Air Act, to provide for maintenance of the 1997 Annual 

PM2.

5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) in the Rome-Floyd County area. The 

submittal also served as a request that the Rome Nonattainment Area be redesignated as an 

area attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.s NAAQS. This letter serves as a submittal of additional 

information to support the previously submitted SIP revision for the Rome area. 

On-road mobile emissions modeling for the plan was performed using EPA's MOtor Vehicle 

Emissions Simulator (MOVES 201 Oa). All input data files for the MOVES modeling used to 

support the plan was previously submitted as well as a summary of the output files. Output files 

are not typically submitted due to the fact that the results can be easily replicated with the 

submitted input files and that the output files are not in a format that can submitted as a paper 

copy as required by Federal regulations regarding SIP submittals. In addition, the raw output 

files include far more information than is necessary to support the SIP revision. EPD is 

providing an electronic copy of the MOVES output files with this submission in an effort to help 

facilitate the review of this SIP revision. 

We look forward to your review and approval of this revision. Should you or your staff have any 

questions, please feel free to contact Jimmy Johnston at (404) 363-7014. 

Sincerely, 

/) /J L,;_ ~~1//- r---

)'ames P. Johnston, P.E. 

Program Manager, Planning and Support Program 

Georgia EPD, Air Protection Branch 

JJ:JK 

Enclosure: 

- MOVES output files (one CD)
<Page>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following registration
statements of our report dated February 24, 2005 (which report expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to a change
in method of accounting for certain nontraditional long-duration contracts and
separate accounts in 2004), relating to the financial statements and financial
statement schedules of Lincoln Benefit Life Company, appearing in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Lincoln Benefit Life Company for the year ended
December 31, 2004.

<Table>
<Caption>
               FORM S-3 REGISTRATION NOS.                      FORM N-4 REGISTRATION NOS.
       -------------------------------------------       ---------------------------------------
                   <S>                                               <C>
                   333-66452                                         333-50545
                   333-59765                                         333-50737
                   333-59769                                         333-61146
                   333-88045                                         333-82427
                   333-111553                                        033-66786
                                                                     333-109688
                                                                     333-66452
</Table>


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Chicago, Illinois
March 15, 2005
j

g

p

Address: City, State , Zip Code

identifying Number: Signature of Subject/Guardian

Speciiic Subject of Photograph:

Any photograph depicting the subject of a Bureau of_________ investigation relating to the above named

individual for the following time priod: to including but not

limited to photographs of injuries, location of accident or incident or other related subject matter.

Other (Specify): V

Purpose or need for photograph:

By a state agency in order to perform a lawfully authorized function including: Investigation of alleged

caregiverlemployee/licensee misconduct involving the above subject andlor program monitoring and evaluation

and/or facility licensure or certification and/or individual certification or licensure. Digital photographs taken of

the subject(s) included within this investigation have not been altered in any way.

Legal Authority: V V

ci Sec.50.03(2), Wis. Stats.U Sec. 48.68 Wis Stats.C Sec. 48.73 Wis. Stats.

U Other: (specify) Statutes relating to inspection of licensee

Name of Requestor or Photographer: Signature:

Title or Position: Phone Number:

Address: Date of Request V

Esrael)dat&forms/Photograph Written Consent Draft Form 2006
----

            REGULATION (EC) No 1923/2006 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL         

of 18 December 2006         

amending Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 152(4)(b) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Having regard to the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (1),

Having consulted the Committee of the Regions,

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty (2),

Whereas:

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 is hereby amended as follows:

Article 2

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

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

Done at Brussels, 18 December 2006.

For the European Parliament

The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES            

For the Council

The President

J.-E. ENESTAM            

----

(1)OJ C 234, 22.9.2005, p. 26.

(2)  Opinion of the European Parliament of 17 May 2006 (not yet published in the Official Journal), Council common position of 24 November 2006 (not yet published in the Official Journal) and Position of the European Parliament of 12 December 2006 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

(3)OJ L 147, 31.5.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1041/2006 (OJ L 187, 8.7.2006, p. 10).

(4)OJ L 163, 23.6.2005, p. 1.

(5)OJ L 41, 14.2.2003, p. 41.

(6)OJ L 273, 10.10.2002, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 208/2006 (OJ L 36, 8.2.2006, p. 25).

(7)OJ L 283, 31.10.2003, p. 29.

(8)OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23. Decision as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC (OJ L 200, 22.7.2006, p. 11.)

----
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1624 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 384
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1624

 To reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 19, 1996

Mr. Hatch (for himself, Mr. Simon, Mr. Specter, Mr. Biden, Mr. Simpson, 
 Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Kohl, Mr. DeWine, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. 
  McConnell, Mr. Johnston, Mr. D'Amato, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. 
Boxer, Mr. Bradley, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Dodd, Mr. 
    Inouye, Mr. Jeffords, Mrs. Kassebaum, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Levin, Mr. 
  Lieberman, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Pell, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Wellstone, Mr. 
Harkin, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Moynihan, Ms. Moseley-Braun, Mr. 
    Graham, Mr. Hatfield, Mr. Robb, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Glenn, and Ms. 
   Mikulski) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

                             April 25, 1996

                Reported by Mr. Hatch, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION.

    The first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 
note) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``for the calendar year 
        1990 and each of the succeeding 4 calendar years'' and 
        inserting ``for each calendar year''; and
            (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``through fiscal year 
        1994''.
                                     

                                                       Calendar No. 384

104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 1624

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             April 25, 1996

                       Reported without amendment
```
#### S. P. STEWART, Plaintiff in Error, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error.

No. A-12035.

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma.

Oct. 20, 1954.

*1020Percy Hughes, Hobart, for plaintiff in error.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.

BRETT, Judge.

The plaintiff in error, S. P. Stewart, defendant below, was charged in the county court of Kiowa county, State of Oklahoma, by information with having committed the offense on the 9th day of June, 1953 in said county and state, of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquors, to-wit, 301⁄2 pints of gin and 201⁄2 pints of whiskey. He was tried by a jury, convicted and his punishment fixed at a $50 fine and 30 days imprisonment in the county jail; judgment and sentence was entered accordingly, from which this appeal has been perfected.

When appeal is made to this court and no brief in support of the petition in error is submitted and the same is submitted on the record without oral argument, this court will examine the record for jurisdictional errors and will read the evidence to determine if it sufficiently supports the judgment and when no fundamental error is apparent the case will be affirmed. Whitlow v. State, 85 Okl.Cr. 2, 184 P.2d 253; Mann v. State, 91 Okl.Cr. 185, 217 P.2d 547; Ganote v. State, Okl.Cr., 254 P.2d 798. We have examined the record and find that the information properly charges the offense of possession of intoxicating liquor and examined the judgment and sentence and find the same to be without fundamental error. Moreover the evidence supports the conviction as determined by the jury. Therefore the judgment and sentence herein is accordingly affirmed.

POWELL, P. J., and JONES,. J., concur.