alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

N o
. 0 9

- 4 1 2 7 2 C o n f e r e n c e C a l e n d a r

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e

v
. J O S E H I N O J O S A , a l s o k n o w n a s J o e A n t h o n y H i n o j o s a , D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

A p p e a l f

r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e S o u t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f T e x a s U S D C N o
. 2 : 0 9

- C R

- 4 8 0

- 1

B e f o r e J O L L Y , S T E W A R T , a n d O W E N , C i r c u i t J u d g e s
. P E R C U R I A M : * A p p e a l i n g t h e j u d g m e n t i n a c r i m i n a l c a s e , J o s e H i n o j o s a p r e s e n t s

a r g u m e n t s t h a t h e c o n c e d e s a r e f o r e c l o s e d

. S e e U n i t e d S t a t e s v
. D a u g h e r t y , 2 6 4 F

. 3 d 5 1 3 , 5 1 8 ( 5 t h C i r
. 2 0 0 1 ) ( r e j e c t i n g C o m m e r c e C l a u s e - b a s e d c h a l l e n g e t o 1 8 U

. S

. C

. § 9 2 2 ( g ) ( 1 ) ) ; U n i t e d S t a t e s v
. D e L e o n , 1 7 0 F

. 3 d 4 9 4 , 4 9 9 ( 5 t h C i r
. 1 9 9 9 ) ( s a m e ) ; U n i t e d S t a t e s v
. R a w l s , 8 5 F

. 3 d 2 4 0 , 2 4 2 ( 5 t h C i r
. 1 9 9 6 ) ( s a m e )

. T h e G o v e r n m e n t ’ s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y a f

f i r m a n c e i s G R A N T E D , a n d t h e j u d g m e n t

o f t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i s A F F I R M E D

. 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 June 22 , 20 10 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm ined t hat this op inion sho uld not * 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 for th in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 09-41272 Document: 00511150178 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/22/2010
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).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# 'Bronco' Brigade Recognized for School Partnership Efforts

By Staff Sgt. Armando Limon

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

GERALD G. FLORENCE,

Petitioner,

v.

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE,

Respondent.

______________________ 

2014-3151

______________________ 

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. DA-0353-13-2022-I-1.

______________________ 

ON MOTION

______________________ 

O R D E R

Upon consideration of Gerald G. Florence’s motion to 

withdraw his petition, 

 IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The motion is granted. The petition is dismissed. 

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

Case: 14-3151 Document: 5 Page: 1 Filed: 08/25/2014
2 FLORENCE v. USPS

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Clerk of Court

s26

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: August 25, 2014

Case: 14-3151 Document: 5 Page: 2 Filed: 08/25/2014
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).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Bringing Marines to the Fight

By  Cpl. Kelsey DornfeldIII Marine Expeditionary Force

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
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).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

# Age is Just a Number

By Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class David A. BrandenburgU.S. Navy

                PACIFIC OCEAN  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 227 (Monday, November 25, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 92928-92929]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27519]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK

Review of Updated Additionality Guidance and Checklist for EXIM's 
Medium and Long-Term Transactions

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Charter directive to supplement and encourage, 
and not compete with, private capital the Export-Import Bank (``EXIM'') 
reviews all applications for additionality. EXIM is in the process of 
updating the 2020 Guidance on assessing additionality and is seeking 
comments on proposed guidelines for determining Additionality on 
requests the Bank receives to support export transactions with 
repayment amortizing over the medium or long term. The proposed 
revisions can be viewed at: https://www.exim.gov/2024-draft-revised-additionality-checklist.

DATES: Comments are due 21 days from publication in the Federal 
Register.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit comments on this transaction 
electronically on www.regulations.gov. To submit a comment, enter 
``Review of Updated Additionality Guidance and Checklist for EXIM's 
Medium and Long-term Transactions'' under the heading ``Enter Keyword 
or ID'' and select Search. Follow the instructions provided at the 
Submit a Comment screen. Please include your name, company name (if 
any) and ``Review of Updated Additionality Guidance and Checklist for 
EXIM's Medium and Long-term Transactions'' on any attached

[[Page 92929]]

document. Comments can also be sent by email to [email protected].

Scott Condren,
Vice President, Policy Analysis Division.
[FR Doc. 2024-27519 Filed 11-22-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
```
No. 82-772.

#### Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. *v.*Federal Communications Commission et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
Exhibit 99.16

                            Selected Information
                      Ford Credit Auto Owner Trust 2001-E
                  September 31, 2001 through December 31, 2001
                    ----------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

           Class A-2        Class A-3        Class A-4        Class B
           Floating Rate    Floating Rate    4.010%           4.480%
           Asset            Asset            Asset            Asset
           Backed           Backed           Backed           Backed
           Notes            Notes            Notes            Notes
           ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------


<S>        <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>

Principal
Paid       $ 86,538,865.35  $0.00            $0.00            $0.00

Interest
Paid       $  8,788,319.32  $  4,770,020.91  $  6,337,969.41  $  1,256,640.00

---------------
Total Servicing Fees Paid:  $ 10,816,600.77


</TABLE>
* The Honorable JOHN R. GIBSON, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

No. 96-9149. Sam NICHOLSON, Appellant,

v. HOOTERS OF AUGUSTA, INC. and Bambi K. Clar k d/b/a Value-Fax of Augusta, Appellees. April 29, 1998. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia (No. 95-00101- CV-1); Dudley H. Bowen, Jr., Judge. Before DUBINA, Circuit Judge , and HILL and JOHN R. GIBSON * , Senior Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: The Petition for Rehearing by the panel is granted. The opinion issued on March 10, 1998 and repor ted at 136 F.3d 1287, is modified in the following respects. The first paragraph, the last sentence, is modified to read: Because we conclude that Congress granted st ate courts exclusive jurisdiction over private actions under the Act, we vacate the judgment of the district court, and remand this case to it with directions to remand the case to the Superior Court of Richmond County, Georgia. The final sentence of the opinion is modified to read: Accordingly, we VACATE the judgment of the district court and REMAND this case to the district court with directions to re mand the case to the Superior Court of Richmond County, Georgia. In all other respects, our opinion reported at 136 F.3d 1287 shall remain in full force and effect.
#### In re Burrill B. EBLE, Individually and d/b/a Craftsman Press, Debtor.

Bankruptcy No. 79-1292.

United States Bankruptcy Court, W. D. New York.

Sept. 15, 1981.

*12Stanley Gordon, Rochester, N. Y., for debtor.

MEMORANDUM AND DECISION

EDWARD D. HAYES, Bankruptcy Judge.

On May 14, 1979, Burrill B. Eble filed his petition for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Act. On November 9,1979, the IRS filed its proof of claim in the amount of $3,046.87. Sometime before June, 1980, the IRS seized the debtors 1979 tax return and applied the same in partial satisfaction of its claim. On June 6,1980, the IRS reduced its claim against the estate to $1,054.34. On October 31, 1980, the Court approved the trustee’s accounting which showed a balance available for distribution of $5,089.61.

If the debtor’s assets had been liquidated and the proceeds distributed prior to the IRS’s refund seizure, the IRS would have been paid in full, approximately $2,000 would have been left for distribution to other creditors, and the debtor could have kept his refund. Instead, the IRS seized property of the debtor that was not property of the estate and thereby reduced its claim against property of the estate. Consequently, at the time of distribution, an additional $2,000 was made available for the satisfaction of other claims.

In effect, the debtor’s tax refund was paid indirectly to general creditors, a result that the general creditors could not have achieved directly. The debtor claims that he, not the general creditors, is entitled to the tax refund amount.

Recognizing that he has no remedy at law, the debtor argues the equitable theory of subrogation. The gist of his argument is that once the IRS filed its claim, the trustee became obligated to pay the entire amount of that claim from assets of the estate. The debtor argues that since he was forced to make partial payment on that claim, he should be subrogated to the rights of the IRS, status quo ante, and receive priority payment of an amount equal to the difference between the IRS’s initial claim and the amount actually paid from assets of the estate.

The debtor cannot prevail with this argument.

> An essential prerequisite to the right of subrogation is that the person seeking subrogation must have made a payment, or had his funds or other property applied, to discharge *another’s*obligation. There must have been an existing liability such as a debt or demand, on which *the other person*was obligated at the time of the payment or application of property. *A person’s payment of his own debt rather than of another’s obligation does not entitle the person to subrogation.*

57 N.Y.Jur., Subrogation § 8 (emphasis added, footnotes omitted); see *Pathe Exchange v. Bray Pictures Corp.,*231 A.D. 465, 247 N.Y.S. 476.

Neither the trustee nor the creditors he represented were indebted to the IRS. The debt was the debtor’s own obligation. Therefore, the debtor is not entitled to sub-rogation and it is so ordered.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 18

- 13409 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 8:18

- cr
- 00119

- JDW

- JSS

- 4

U NITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus EMILIANO AYON LOPEZ,

Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida

________________________ ( July 5, 2019)
B efore ED CARNES, Chief Judge, JILL PRYOR and ANDERSON , Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Case: 18-13409 Date Filed: 07/05/2019 Page: 1 of 22 Mark O’Brien , appointed counsel for Emiliano Lopez in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 ( 1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is
GRANTED , and Lopez’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED

.

Case: 18-13409 Date Filed: 07/05/2019 Page: 2 of 2
#### The State *v.*Henry Waller.

*1*I From Edgecombe. J

Indictment charged, that Defendant was a common, gross, and notorious drunkard, and that he, on divers days and times, got grossly drunk.— Judgment arrested, for

Private drunkenness is no offence by our municipal laws. It becomes so, by being open and exposed to public view, so as to become anuisance. It must be so charged, and the Jury must so find it, before the Court can render Judgment.

The indictment charged, “that Henry Waller, late of “ the County of Edgecombe, yeoman, on the first day of “ January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight “ hundred and seventeen, and on divers other clays and “ times, as well before as afterwards, was, and yet is, a *230
      *“*common, gross, and notorious drunkard, and that he, on *“*^10 sa^ ^anuaiT’ i*1 the year aforesaid, and *e‘*on divers, other days and times,, in the County aforesaid, *“*did then and there get grossly drunk, and. commit open “ and notorious drunkenness, contrary to morality, to the *“*great displeasure of Almighty God, and to the evil ex- *“*ample of all others in like cases offending, and against *“*the peace and dignity of the State.”

The Defendant submitted, and it was moved in arrest of judgment, that the offence, as charged in the indictment, was not *indictable;*and the case being sent to this Court,

Henderson, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the Court:

Private drunkenness is no offence by our municipal laws. It becomes so by being open and exposed to public view, to that extent that it thereby becomes a nuisance, *commune uocumentum ;*and that is a question of fact to be tried by the Jury. There being no charge in this indictment to that effect, the Jury has not, and could not pass on *it;*which being of the very essence of the crime, the judgment must be arrested.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 11.1


                             COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS
                                  PER SHARE (1)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         THREE MONTHS                       NINE MONTHS
                                                                      ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,                ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                                      -------------------                -------------------
                                                                     1997             1996              1997             1996
                                                                  -----------      -----------       -----------      -----------
<S>                                                               <C>              <C>               <C>              <C>
Primary and Fully Diluted:
Weighted average common shares outstanding for the period . .       8,366,000        8,239,000         8,320,000        8,185,000
                                                                  ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------
                                                                  ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------
Net loss  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     $(2,835,000)     $(2,538,000)      $(8,810,000)     $(7,192,000)
                                                                  ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------
                                                                  ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------

Net loss per share  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       ($0.34)          ($0.31)           ($1.06)          ($0.88)
                                                                    -------          -------           -------          -------
                                                                    -------          -------           -------          -------
</TABLE>


(1)  Primary and fully diluted calculations are substantially the same.


                                       19
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 April 28, 2014

t0421

Order 

Clerk

April 28, 2014

148299

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 148299

COA: 310403

Ionia CC: 2011-015114-FH

MICHAEL ROBERT BRIDINGER,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 24, 2013 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
No. 91-5971.

#### Peralta *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Advanced
Lighting Technologies, Inc. Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for the
nine months ended March 31, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           3,744
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,673
<ALLOWANCES>                                       970
<INVENTORY>                                     47,038
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                88,085
<PP&E>                                         130,995
<DEPRECIATION>                                  21,533
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 306,137
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           47,985
<BONDS>                                        157,770
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           16,411
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            20
<OTHER-SE>                                      83,654
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   306,137
<SALES>                                        171,010
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               171,010
<CGS>                                          103,966
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  103,966
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                55,279
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   132
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,693
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,805
<INCOME-TAX>                                       549
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,256
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,243
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>