alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

HARRY J. JOHNSON,

Claimant-Appellant,

v.

ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs,

Respondent-Appellee.

______________________ 

2013-7091

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims in No. 12-1164, Chief Judge Bruce E. 

Kasold.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

ZACHARY M. STOLZ, Chisholm Chisholm & Kilpatrick, 

Ltd., of Providence, Rhode Island, argued for claimant–

appellant. With him on the brief was THOMAS R. BENDER. 

Of counsel on the brief was CHRISTOPHER J. CLAY, Disabled American Veterans, of Cold Spring, Kentucky. Of 

counsel was ROBERT V. CHISHOLM, Chisholm Chisholm & 

Kilpatrick, ltd., of Providence, Rhode, Island. 

MICHAEL P. GOODMAN, Trial Attorney, Commercial 

Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Depart-
 

ment of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. With him on the brief were STUART F.

DELERY, Assistant Attorney General, BRYANT G. SNEE, 

Acting Director, and SCOTT D. AUSTIN, Assistant Director. 

Of counsel on the brief were DAVID J. BARRANS, Deputy 

Assistant General Counsel, and CHRISTINA L. GREGG, 

Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, 

of Washington, DC. Of counsel was LARA EILHARDT, 

Attorney. 

______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (RADER, Chief Judge, BRYSON, and 

HUGHES, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

March 13, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Date Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Curis, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended
June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Michael P. Gray, Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.

Dated: July 28, 2006



/s/    MICHAEL P. GRAYMichael P. Gray Senior Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                Certification of
                            American River Bankshares
            pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
          regarding Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
                               September 30, 2005


         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each
of the undersigned officers of American River Bankshares, a California
corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify that:

         1.       The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
                  ended September 30, 2005 (the "Form 10-Q") fully complies with
                  the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
                  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

         2.       Information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
                  material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company.


Dated:  November 10, 2005              By: /s/ DAVID T. TABER
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           David T. Taber
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer


Dated:  November 10, 2005              By: /s/ MITCHELL A. DERENZO
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Mitchell A. Derenzo
                                           Executive Vice President and
                                           Chief Financial Officer



         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to American River Bankshares and will be retained by American
River Bankshares and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.


                                       39
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 287

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow homemakers to

get a full IRA deduction.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 10), 1995

Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. ASHCROFT,

Mr. BENNETT, Mr. BOND, Mr. BROWN, Mr. BURNS, Mr. COATS, Mr.

COCHRAN, Mr. COHEN, Mr. COVERDELL, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. D’AMATO, Mr.

DEWINE, Mr. DOLE, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. FAIRCLOTH, Mr. FRIST, Mr.

GORTON, Mr. GRAMM, Mr. GRAMS, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. GREGG, Mr.

HATCH, Mr. HATFIELD, Mr. HELMS, Mr. INHOFE, Mrs. KASSEBAUM,

Mr. KEMPTHORNE, Mr. KYL, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. LOTT, Mr. MACK, Mr.

MCCAIN, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. MURKOWSKI, Mr. NICKLES, Mr. PRESSLER, Mr. ROTH, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr.

SMITH, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. THOMAS, Mr. THOMPSON, Mr.

THURMOND, Mr. WARNER, Mr. BREAUX, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. JOHNSTON, Mr. MOYNIHAN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. REID, Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN,

and Mr. SIMON) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow

homemakers to get a full IRA deduction.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•S 287 IS

1 SECTION 1. HOMEMAKERS ELIGIBLE FOR FULL IRA DE2 DUCTION.

3 (a) SPOUSAL IRA COMPUTED ON BASIS OF COM4 PENSATION OF BOTH SPOUSES.—Subsection (c) of section

5 219 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to

6 special rules for certain married individuals) is amended

7 to read as follows:

8 ‘‘(c) SPECIAL RULES FOR CERTAIN MARRIED INDI9 VIDUALS.—

10 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an individual

11 to whom this paragraph applies for the taxable year,

12 the limitation of paragraph (1) of subsection (b)

13 shall be equal to the lesser of—

14 ‘‘(A) $2,000, or

15 ‘‘(B) the sum of—

16 ‘‘(i) the compensation includible in

17 such individual’s gross income for the tax18 able year, plus

19 ‘‘(ii) the compensation includible in

20 the gross income of such individual’s

21 spouse for the taxable year reduced by the

22 amount allowable as a deduction under

23 subsection (a) to such spouse for such tax24 able year.
3

•S 287 IS

1 ‘‘(2) INDIVIDUALS TO WHOM PARAGRAPH (1)

2 APPLIES.—Paragraph (1) shall apply to any individ3 ual if—

4 ‘‘(A) such individual files a joint return for

5 the taxable year, and

6 ‘‘(B) the amount of compensation (if any)

7 includible in such individual’s gross income for

8 the taxable year is less than the compensation

9 includible in the gross income of such individ10 ual’s spouse for the taxable year.’’

11 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

12 (1) Paragraph (2) of section 219(f) of the In13 ternal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to other defi14 nitions and special rules) is amended by striking

15 ‘‘subsections (b) and (c)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection

16 (b)’’.

17 (2) Section 408(d)(5) of such Code is amended

18 by striking ‘‘$2,250’’ and inserting ‘‘$2,000’’.

19 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

20 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

21 December 31, 1994.

Æ
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-60380 Conference Calendar

RICKEY DALE MESHELL, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus EDDIE LUCAS, COMMISSIONER, MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:94-CV-168-S-B

- - - - - - - - - - October 24, 1996 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Rickey Dale Meshell, Mississippi inmate #49979, appeals the dismissal, without prejudice, as frivolous of his civil rights complaint. Meshell argues that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing the appeal for the following reasons: Meshell was entitled to the procedural protections of Wolff v. McDonnell , 418 U.S. 539, 564-66 (1974); Meshell’s punishment ofNo. 96-60380 - 2 - close confinement is atypical from the ordinary incidents of prison life and thus distinguishable from Sandin v. Conner , 115 S. Ct. 2293, 2300 (1995); and the district court erred by dismissing the suit before service. We have carefully reviewed the arguments and the appellate record. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint as frivolous. See Denton v. Hernandez , 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992). The appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous.
See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Meshell that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Meshell is further cautioned to review all pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7006
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus J. C. LEE, III, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CR-94-16-BR, CA-95-370-BR) Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 3, 1996 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. J. C. Lee, III, Appellant Pro Se. Jane H. Jolly, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Lee , Nos. CR-94-16-BR; CA-95-370-BR (E.D.N.C. May 4, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) Site Related Environmental Assessment Program 3M and Dyneon LLC Decatur, Alabama Raw Data Appendices to July 1, 2010 to September 30, 2010 Quarterly Status Report

05P-0542 v1-3 3M Company St. Paul, Minnesota

®
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
            
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-11307 and 333-11277) of RemedyTemp, Inc. of our
report dated November 14, 1997, appearing on page 29 of the Annual Report to
Shareholders which is incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form
10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report on the
Financial Statement Schedule, which appears on page 15 of such this Form 10-K.




/S/ PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP
------------------------
Price Waterhouse LLP
Costa Mesa, California
December 22, 1997
<TABLE> <S> <C>

 <ARTICLE>                    5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
condensed  consolidated balance sheet of TV Filme, Inc. at December 31, 1999 and
the condensed  consolidated  statement of operations for the year ended December
31,  1999 and is  qualified  in its  entirety  by  reference  to such  financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                     JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                  42,175
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                            3,125
<ALLOWANCES>                               651
<INVENTORY>                              2,750
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        53,099
<PP&E>                                  64,296
<DEPRECIATION>                          39,291
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          83,322
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  174,064
<BONDS>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<COMMON>                                   108
<OTHER-SE>                             (91,534)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            83,741
<SALES>                                 26,177
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        26,177
<CGS>                                   11,844
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           19,289
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        14,205
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         1,336
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     (24,088)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        (66,570)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    (66,570)
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                           (66,570)
<EPS-BASIC>                              (6.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                            (6.15)


</TABLE>
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 12-20111 USDC No. 4:10-CR-763-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MICHAEL GIVENTER, also known as Michael Blanc, Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Michael Giventer appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion to revoke the magistrate judge’s order of d e t ention pending his trial on criminal charges related to bankruptcy proceedings. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3142, 3145. Under Rule 9(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, a “district court must state in writing, or orally on the record, the reasons for an order regarding the release or detention of a defendant in a criminal case.” To date, the district court has not given its reasons for denying Giventer’s motion. Accordin gly , I T I S ORDERED that this matter is REMANDED to the district court for the limited U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D March 28 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Pursua nt to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the court hasd ete rm inedthat this op inion s houldnot * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 12-20111 Document: 00511804452 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/28/2012No. 12-20111

purpose of obtaining written reasons f o r the denial of Giventer’s motion to revoke the order of detention.

2 Case: 12-20111 Document: 00511804452 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/28/2012
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.4

                                    Statement

     Pursuant to (S)906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. (S)1350,
the undersigned officer of Paperweight Development Corp. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies that:

     (7)  the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June
          30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

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


Dated:  August 13, 2002


                                          /s/ Dale E. Parker
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Name:  Dale E. Parker
                                          Title: Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
EXHIBIT 11.1 COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER COMMON SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                                   2000            1999           1998
                                                               --------------------------------------------
<S>                                                            <C>            <C>             <C>00


BASIC:

Net income attributable to common shares..................       $ (117,806)      $ (27,806)      $ 20,552
                                                              =============================================

Weighted average common shares outstanding................            22,108          22,088        21,905
                                                              =============================================

Per share amount..........................................          $ (5.33)        $ (1.26)        $ 0.94
                                                              =============================================

DILUTED:

Net income/(loss) ........................................       $ (117,806)      $ (27,806)      $ 20,552


Net effect of convertible debentures based on the
       if-converted method, assuming 100% conversion-

       $35,000,000, 6.75%, due 2006.......................                                          $1,563
       $50,000,000, 7.0%, due 2004........................                                          $2,349
       $143,750,000 5.25%, due 2002.......................                                          $5,180

                                                              ---------------------------------------------
Net income/(loss) attributable to common shares...........       $ (117,806)       $(27,806)      $ 29,644
                                                              =============================================


Weighted average common shares outstanding................            22,108          22,088        21,905

Net effect of convertible debentures based on the
if-converted method, assuming 100% conversion-

       $35,000,000, 6.75%, due 2006.......................                                           1,717
       $50,000,000, 7.0%, due 2004........................                                           2,469
       $143,750,000 5.25%, due 2002.......................                                           5,000


 Net effect of dilutive stock options based on the treasury
stock method, using average market price..................                                             523

                                                              ---------------------------------------------
Totals                                                                22,108          22,088        31,614
                                                              =============================================
Per share amount..........................................          $ (5.33)        $ (1.26)         $0.94
                                                              =============================================

</TABLE>
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of

-- ) ) AAC Commercial Building Corporation )

(d/b/a Huryn Justice General Contractors) ) ) Under Contract No. N40085-11-D-8025 ) APPEARANCES FORTHE APPELLANT:

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 59633

Reginald M. Jones, Esq. Nicholas T. Solosky, Esq.

Fox Rothschild LLP Washington, DC Ronald J. Borro, Esq.

Navy ChiefTrial Attorney Stephen Bacon, Esq.

Trial Attorney ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. Dated: 1May 2015

Administrative Judge Acting Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59633, Appeal ofAAC Commercial Building Corporation (d/b/a Huryn Justice General Contractors), rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Dale E. Parker, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Appleton Papers Inc.,
certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of
Appleton Papers Inc.;



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



4. The registrant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(c) for the registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



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



|                  |  |                                           
|----------------- |  | ------------------------------------------
|November 12, 2004
|                  | 
|Signature:        |  | /s/ DALE E. PARKER                        
|                  |  | Dale E. Parker                            
|                  |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer