alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-60955

Summary Calendar

LATRELL ADAMS,

Plaintiff–Appellant,

v.

CHRISTOPHER EPPS, MDOC Commissioner; LAWRENCE KELLY, MSP

Superintendent; DARLESTER FOSTER, Deputy Warden,

Defendants–Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:07-CV-131

Before KING, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Latrell Adams filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit against various Mississippi

state prison officials alleging that he should have been transferred from a

Mississippi prison to a Kentucky prison under the Interstate Corrections

Compact (ICC). The district court dismissed Adams’s lawsuit pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (g) for failure to state a claim on which relief could be

granted. Adams has appealed the district court’s decision, arguing that he

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 24, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-60955

2

should be transferred because his life is at risk, and he moves to expedite the

appeal. 

Adams does not have any constitutional interest in educational or

rehabilitation programs provided by the prison pursuant to the ICC. See

Esparza v. Deputy, No. 93-8665, 1994 WL 122158 (5th Cir. Mar. 25, 1994).

Furthermore, Adams does not have a protectable property or liberty interest in

where he is housed. See Montanye v. Haymes, 427 U.S. 236, 242 (1976); Wilson

v. Budney, 976 F.2d 957, 958 (5th Cir. 1992). Finally, Adams has failed to allege

facts which warrant judicial intervention with respect to the prison’s decisions

regarding Adams’s housing assignment. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825,

833 (1994); Horton v. Cockrell, 70 F.3d 397, 400-02 (5th Cir. 1995).

The district court’s dismissal of Adams’s complaint for failure to state a

claim counts as a strike for purposes of § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons,

103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 1996). Adams is cautioned that once he accumulates

three strikes, he may not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal

filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under

imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).

AFFIRMED; MOTION TO EXPEDITE APPEAL DENIED; SANCTION

WARNING ISSUED.
~ 

PRIORITY 

TOP SECRET 

FROM 0 

. 

TO . . DTG 0 

. 

LT COL FRY ' ' 

NSA PENTAGON LIA GP 

MR CC CORRY, C/SEC 

24 APRIL 54 

INFO: VICE DIRECTOR 1 

S/ASST(MR FRIEDMAN) 2 

PROD (DR SINKOV) 3 

C/S fi 

DD/COMSEC 5-7 

115 8 

THE roLLOWING MSG RECEIVED THIS DATE FROM G-2 IS FORWARDED: 

"REF. NR. 113¢ 24 APRIL 1954 

TOP SECRET COLONEL FRY FOR DIRNSA FROM RAVEN AND AUSTIN 

MEETING WITH FRENCH HAVE STARTED AND APPEAR TO BE GOING 

WELL. NO DIFFICULTIES SO FAR. DANGEROUS PRACTICES PhPER 

SUBSTANTIALLY APPROVED AND MINIMUM STANDARD PAPER HAS BEEN 

INTRODUCED." 

DATE RECD: 26/1513Z APR 54 TWfOM 

TOP SECRET cmHROL #54-1-¢1379 PAGE 1 Of 1 PAGE 

COPY -~-OF 8 COP! ES 

PARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED 

CONSULT CRYPTOCENTER BEFORE DECLASSIFYING 

TOP SECRET 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 05-08-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
# CE2004084EN.01084602.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/846 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/846

---

(2004/C 84 E/0940)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0697/04

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject:   State aid to credit unions

Subject:

Can the Commission confirm what are the State aid regulations for small credit unions serving identified local areas?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2004)

(23 April 2004)

State aid to credit unions serving identified local areas is subject to the general State Aid regulatory framework and case law, if the conditions set out in Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty are fulfilled. As the features of credit unions differ in terms of their membership, activities, products, scale and purpose, it is important to assess the schemes on a case by case basis.

Aid granted to credit unions would have to be examined under the relevant State aid rules, for example Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises (1) or the Commission Guidelines on national regional aid. It should also be reminded that, according to Commission Regulation (EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid (1), financial support granted to an undertaking up to an amount of EUR 100 000 over a period of three years is not considered to be state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.

1

1

Where it is found that Credit Unions are deemed to provide a service of general economic interest and receive State aid for the compensation of the net extra costs of such services, an assessment for compatibility would be carried out to assess whether the derogation provided for under Article 86(2) may be applied.

The above is intended to provide an overview of the process that may be applied to credit unions in so far as an examination for State Aid is concerned.

---

(1)  OJ L 10, 13.1.2001.

1

---
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

  We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts" and to
the use of our report dated April 26, 1999, relating to John Hancock Mutual
Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries in Amendment No. 1 to the Registration
Statement (Form S-1 No. 333-87271) and related Prospectus of John Hancock
Financial Services, Inc.

  Our audit also included the financial statement schedules of John Hancock
Mutual Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries listed in Item 16(b). These
schedules are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion,
the financial statement schedules referred to above, when considered in
relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly in
all material respects the information set forth therein.

                                          /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
                                            Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

November 16, 1999
P.1 

OAR Box 1812 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

288) IV--C-1 

Docket Number: fr&'&3 

Printed 11/3/2008 10:13:06 AM Sheet 288 of 307 
P.2 

USE3 

c 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

NOV 2 2 1989 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

Honorable Roy Romer 

Governor of Colorado 

Executive Chambers 

136 State Capitol 

Denver, CO 80203-1792 

Dear Governor Romer: 

nr - i i 

£ • DEC I I W9 SU| 

EPA AislracKFL 

I am writing in response to your letter to Mr. Richard D. 

Wilson, Director of the Office of Mobile Sources, dated October 

11th and submitted as written testimony at our hearing on 

diesel fuel quality standards on the same date. we are 

grateful for the support of the State of Colorado in our 

efforts to establish national diesel fuel quality standards. 

As part of our efforts to produce a final rule, we will 

continue to evaluate all comments sent to us regarding our 

proposal and to make changes in the Final Rule where 

appropriate and practical. Your comments are being placed in 

the public docket and will be fully considered as part of that 

process. We look forward to the receipt of more detailed 

comments from Mr. Beckham on behalf of the Colorado Department 

of Health. 

Sincei-el y yours,' 

/^.^//^ , 

Charles L. Gray, Jr/. 

Director 

Emission Control Technology Division 

1322w
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.1

                                 POWER OF ATTORNEY

     We, the undersigned officers and directors of Viisage Technology, Inc.,
hereby jointly and severally constitute and appoint Thomas J. Colatosti and
Charles J. Johnson, and each of them singly, our true and lawful attorneys with
full power to them, and each of them singly, to sign for us and in our names in
the capacities indicated below, the Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed
herewith and any and all amendments to said Registration Statement and generally
to do all such things in our names and on our behalf in our capacities as
officers and directors to enable Viisage Technology, Inc. to comply with the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and all requirements of the Securities and
Exchange Commission, hereby ratifying and confirming all signatures as they may
be signed by our said attorneys, or any of them, to said Registration Statement
and all amendments thereto.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Signature                           Title
---------                           -----
<S>                                 <C>
By: /s/ Denis K. Berube             Chairman of the Board of Directors
    -------------------
Denis K. Berube


By: /s/ Thomas J. Colatosti         President and Chief Executive Officer
    -----------------------         (Principal Executive Officer and Principal
Thomas J. Colatosti                 and Accounting Officer)


By: /s/ Charles J. Johnson          Secretary and Director
    ----------------------
Charles J. Johnson


By: /s/ Harriet Mouchly-Weiss       Director
    -------------------------
Harriet Mouchly-Weiss


By: /s/ Peter Nessen                Director
    ----------------
Peter Nessen


By: /s/ Thomas J. Reilly            Director
    --------------------
Thomas J. Reilly


By: /s/ Charles E. Levine           Director
    ---------------------
Charles E. Levine
</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 5.1
                                                                     -----------

                             CHOATE, HALL & STEWART
               A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS
                                 EXCHANGE PLACE
                                53 STATE STREET
                          BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS  02109
                           TELEPHONE  (617) 248-5000
                           FACSIMILE  (617) 248-4000
                                TELEX  49615860

                                    October 12, 1999


Aseco Corporation
500 Donald Lynch Boulevard
Marlboro, MA  01752

Ladies and Gentlemen:

     This opinion is delivered to you in connection with the registration
statement on Form S-8 (the "Registration Statement") to be filed on October 12,
1999 by Aseco Corporation (the "Company") under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, for registration under said Act of 150,000 shares (the "Additional
Shares") of common stock, $.01 par value (the "Common Stock"), of the Company.

     We are familiar with the Company's Third Restated Certificate of
Incorporation, its Amended and Restated By-Laws, and its corporate minute book,
as well as the Registration Statement.  We have also examined such other
documents, records and certificates and made such further investigation as we
have deemed necessary for the purposes of this opinion.

     Based upon and subject to the foregoing, we are of the opinion that the
Additional Shares to be sold by the Company under its 1993 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, as in effect on the date hereof, when issued against receipt of
the agreed purchase price therefor, will be legally issued, fully paid and
nonassessable.

     We understand that this opinion is to be used in connection with the
Registration Statement and consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit
to the Registration Statement and to all references to this Firm included
therein.

                              Very truly yours,



                              /s/ Choate, Hall & Stewart
                              CHOATE, HALL & STEWART
-- -· - --- .... - . -

Prote•aor le11D4fl'• MIOIAme 

kku-tllall 

UniYV•1t.J ot Chic~o 

rucaao :s1, llltnota 

_____ ..._ --~-- ::-_. -:.;. - --..1.r- --:.-

REF ID:A64668 

l tru1Jt tbat by DOV 70U eN back U\ 'tbiJI 00\Ult.q .rt.er '°'"" aumor 1a IUJq>e. 

Ia nprcl to tou:r Md:>erth.S,p co tbl Matbema.Uea PaDel or 

\be ht1cmal 8eC\l.r1t7 ~'¥ 8c1mtit1c Advieor,r Bcord, n woul.4 

Uh to -.cqustnt you vltb the bi&hli!bt• ct Q\1,1" C"W"rent. orp.a1ca- tlcm and U•• et&tt MIA mke a 4et&!led ,reunta.t1on ct acsa ct 

our tecbnieal. problema.. A two-dq •1•1t to tt.o ~1 •hvi..ll.4 H 

1utt1a1ent tor thia inarpcse, d. it u.n l>e ltl'l'MCcd at a»7 tillct 

OOOV\lnlent to 70\l• 

1 • notif71q th4t Chief ot the IU. Be&iatr.v tor Cona\lltant1 

cf tbi• tlrYite.ttoc tt0 that be can s..e41atel.7 Mnd JQl the ~· 

aeeeaD&r,y to ettect 7QUr otticlal tippOintment M oeuult&at tor 

tbe ~<17· 

tt 10\1 vlll lAt .. lmO'tt' tllft• Cl' tour web b. ... 'nACe ot 

tM Aate JOU would. like to.-. tbi• rtait1 -4 WU• t.be mode 

ot tram~ pnrer, w vi1l ~ tM uce•N.17 aro.er. NBt 70U• 

With COl'dtal ~be• aid }K)p1D& to ...., our uf,\l&inte.nce, 

l• 

eci NJ 

c/s 

l/J..BSr. {~. Friedman} 

nRS (NSARC) 

M/R s 6el.:t expl.&n&tor,y .. 

WILLUMr.n~ 

Jncut1v. Secnt&r;r 

IM ICtentSJ':f.c Ah190rl' loar4 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-17-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in (i) the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-17235) pertaining to the 1992 Stock Incentive
Plan; (ii) the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-17273) pertaining to
the 1995 Stock Incentive Plan; (iii) the Registration Statements (Form S-8
No. 333-2910, Form S-8 No. 333-40903 and Form S-8 No. 333-65323) pertaining
to the 1996 Stock Incentive Plan; (iv) the Registration Statements (Form S-8
No. 333-2908 and Form S-8 No. 333-65343) pertaining to the 1996 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan; and (v) the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-67833) pertaining to the NaviCyte, Inc. 1997 Stock Plan of Trega
Biosciences, Inc. of our report dated January 27, 2000, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Trega Biosciences, Inc. included in its
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1999.

                                              /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

San Diego, California
March 9, 2000
<PAGE>

CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT                                             EXHIBIT 10.29


                AMENDMENT TO OEM DEVELOPMENT SOFTWARE AGREEMENT

This Amendment to OEM Development Software Agreement is made as of 4/28/99
                                                                   -------
between Mitra Imaging Inc. ("MITRA") and ACCESS Radiology Corporation
("ACCESS").

ACCESS and MITRA are parties to an OEM Development Software Agreement dated as
of November 9, 1995 and a subsequent Amendment dated May 20, 1997 ("the OEM
Agreement").  ACCESS and MITRA wish to amend the OEM Agreement as set forth
below.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth
the parties hereto agree as follows:

1.   Addition of Section 4.1.5  Section 4 is amended by adding the following
item:

[*Redacted pursuant to Confidentiality Treatment Request dated September 10,
1999.

                                                                               ]

The license fee paid under this section is for any combination of DTK for
Windows and DTK for UNIX licenses that are incorporated into each copy of
application software by ACCESS, for which the total number of licenses used is
three hundred(300).

[*Redacted pursuant to Confidentiality Treatment Request dated September 10,
1999.]



ACCESS agrees to continue reporting license usage on a monthly basis for the
period beginning December 1, 1998.

If MITRA terminates this agreement in accordance with Section 8.2 of the
Agreement, MITRA will reimburse ACCESS an amount equal to the value of the
prepaid licenses that are unreported as of the termination date.


                            Confidential Treatment

                                      -1-
<PAGE>

2.   Amendment of Section 8.1  Section 8.1 is amended to read as follows:

8.1  This Agreement shall have an initial term ending on December 31, 2004,
subject to earlier termination as provided below.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date
first above written.

ACCESS RADIOLOGY CORPORATION                 MITRA IMAGING INC.



BY:  /s/                                     By:  /s/
     -----------------------                      ------------------------------

Name                                         Name
Title                                        Title


                            Confidential Treatment

                                      -2-
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Riggs National
Corporation (the Company) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Robert L. Allbritton, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, 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 result of
operations of the Company.

|                             |  | 
|---------------------------- |  | 
|By: /s/ Robert L. Allbritton |  | 
|                            
|                            
|                            
|                            
|                             |  | 
|                            
|                            
|                            
|                            
|Name: Robert L. Allbritton   |  | 
|                            
|                            
|                            
|                            
|Chief Executive Officer      |  | 
|                            
|                            
|                            
|                            
|November 8, 2002             |  |
---l--+-f .:::.-..&.:· -~. ,,_, .11.11· ......... -·I -

TO : 0..~ 

Via 302 

03T 

FBOM: 34 

r"" ~ --

REF ID:A65902 

·~A~ 

5 March 195?. 

Re"Dort ot trip to PriDct~.oa Univere,1 tz, Pr1nq.eton1 ,HJ,,,a. 

On Monday, 3 ttarch 1952, LCdr, Gleason and I vtsi ted 

Prof'. von Neumann at Princeton. acaompa.nied 'b7 Dr. H .. T. Engstrom 

and A. E. Roberts, Jr. of 'ERA., 

The principnl aubJect of discu.eaion vn.s tbe computational 

method bcinr. tried by Roberts as an analytic wq of recover1n£ a 

substitution, It wa.a agreed that hie recent erperimenta are en• 

couraging, and nothing should be allowed to interfere witll -pushing th~s method to a conclusion. 

In the course of the discussion it a.weA.red that Prof. von 

'N'e'WDaml h."?.d beon studying an alternntiTP method. '.rhis method is 

to find a line~r combination of ~11 rerrnitntions, ench weighted 

a.ccord.inr; 'to how well or how bndl.1' it fitted the ~ven dA.ta. Although this sounds as though n! coeff'ic:i.ents nrtl.St be evaluated. 

von Neuriann bas a.n inr,on1nus 'T"l'OCedure which would cut the work 

to leas thnn n4 comtnlt~tionm. It !a not 7et clear tha.t the 

r.iethod would work or thnt the computations a.re feA.Bible, but the 

idea ~s novel and worth at le~st a ~reli~in~ry inveoti~ation. 

ce: 302 

03T 

03 Re~din~ file 

243 

206 

02'.l' / 

OOT ./ 

n. 

11~· n. OA?lfPf1f!rF. rChte:r. 34 V 

' """ - .... "' 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 04-15-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a
Exhibit 23.5

Consent of Chris Roney

I
consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of North American Palladium Ltd., which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, of references to my name and references to my involvement in the
preparation of NI 43-101 Technical Report for Lac des Iles Mine, Ontario Incorporating a Preliminary Economic Assessment of Mine Expansion Plan (effective date of February 18, 2015) included in the 2014 Annual Information Form of
North American Palladium Ltd., dated March 31, 2015 (the AIF).

I also consent to the incorporation by reference
in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-13766) and Registration Statement on Form F-10 (File No. 333-200762) of the references to my name and the above-mentioned information in the AIF.

Dated this 31st day of March, 2015.



|     |  |                     
|---- |  | --------------------
|Per: |  | /s/ Chris Roney     
|     |  | Chris Roney, P.Geo. 
|     |  | Consulting Geologist
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 21

- 00096

- CV

M ARIE G RAVES

, Appellant

V

.

DJO, LLC

, Appellee §

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 431st District

Court

of Denton Co u nty ( 20

- 3562

- 462 )

November 4 , 2021

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

JUDGMENT ON REHEARING

After con sidering Appellee DJO, LLC ’ s motion for rehearing , we den y the

motion. We deny Appellee ’ s motion for en banc reconsideration as moot. However,

we wi thdr aw our September 3 0, 2021 opinion and judgment and subs titute the

f ollowing.

Having considered the record on appeal, this co urt holds that there was error in

the trial court’s order denying Appellant Marie Graves’s special appearance. We

therefore vac a te th e trial court’s order denying the special appearance, and we dismiss

the cause for want of jurisdiction.It is further ordered that Appellee shall pay all of the costs of this cause , for

which let execution issue.

S ECOND DISTR ICT COURT OF A PPEALS

By /s/ Wade Birdwell Justice Wade Birdwell
99-781.

#### Kremnec v. Unemp. Comp. Bd of Review.

Lucas App. No. L-98-1248. Reported at 86 Ohio St.3d 1436, 713 N.E.2d 1048. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION

The undersigned certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:

(1)  The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
December 31, 2002, 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

|     |  |                   |  |                                                                                      
|---- |  | ----------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date |  | February 14, 2003 |  | /s/ Jay A. HermanJay A. Herman
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer                  
|    
|Date |  | February 14, 2003 |  | /s/ Robert M. BarniskisRobert M. Barniskis
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
-~-. 

·-

.~ -

~ ..... 

. .. 

-· 

--· 

IE_ 

E: 

&'~ ..... 

-. ~-

Adjutant General 

. · .,._ 

- -

-. ~ 

·1ette? ot Capt. 'Mu,r C. tam as 

Custodian ot Cr.yptographio Material. 

Consultant 31 March 1952 

i. Per Paragraph S, Headquarters,, ASA s.o. No. S9 relieving Capt. Mar.v 

c. Lane1 L-1241 WAC tran dut7 111.th AFSA, it is requested that Capt. Lana be 

rell&V'ed or her dutt.es as cryptographic cwstod1an tor the Con8Ul.tant. 

2~ Tho relief ot Capt. Lane from AFSA has been set 'b1' Milltaiy Personnel 

as 4 April. Request ia made that orders be issued in t1m tor clearame at 

this material.. 

WILLIAM F • FRI :WHAN 

consuitant 

-- - ... filpproved for Release by NSA _on 06-16-2014 pursuant to E.O. 1352a. _ ~-

-. -

... -.' t ........ 

. 

i 

- . 

• 

.. I 

' .J 

·_ 'i