alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DWAYNE D. HAGANS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-3497

_____________________________/

Opinion filed November 9, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Waddell A. Wallace, Judge.

Dwayne D. Hagans, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, WETHERELL, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 23, 2009

d0615 

# Order

June 23, 2009

136586(53) 136588(53)

FRANK RICHARD JACOBSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 136586 COA: 281587 Washtenaw CC: 06-000289-CH NORFOLK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

_____________ _______________ ____________/

FRANK RICHARD JACOBSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 136588 COA: 283361 Washtenaw CC: 06-000289-CH NORFOLK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

_____________ _______________ ____________/

On order of the Court, the motion for re consideration of this Court’s January 30, 2009 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does notappear that the order was entered erroneously.
SERVED MARCH 9,2010 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

EMPIRE AIRWAYS 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP10EA0002 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMSNO. FAA-2010-0191 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2009EA110039) has been 

assigned to Administrative Law Judge Isaac D. Benkin. All future pleadings and other 

communications regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA 

Hearing Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service List. 

iw.A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative Law 

Attachment - Service List 
FAA Docket No. CP10EA0002 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC^30 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Charles J. Casolaro, Respondent's Counsel 

Casolaro Sussman, LLP 

1050 Franklin Avenue, Suite 402 

Garden City, NY 11530 

TEL: 516-248-1399 

FAX: 516-248-2257 

Zachary M. Berman, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3258 

FAX: 718-995-5699 

The Honorable Isaac D. Benkin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: Attorney 202-366-0437 

Legal Assistant 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 

2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 57 (Wednesday, March 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 15757]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06788]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy


Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive Patent License; Premium 
Manufacturing Group

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy hereby gives notice of its intent 
to grant to Premium Manufacturing Group a revocable, nonassignable, 
exclusive license to practice in the field of use of a knife and knife 
components in the United States, the Government-owned inventions 
described in U.S. Patent No. 7,421,751 entitled ``Folding Knife Having 
Locking Portion, Clip Portion and Unsharpened Protrusion'', Navy Case 
No. 097,793 and any continuations, divisionals or re-issues thereof.

DATES: Anyone wishing to object to the granting of this license must 
file written objections along with supporting evidence, if any, not 
later than April 9, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Written objections are to be filed with the U.S. Naval 
Academy, Academic Dean and Provost Office, 589 McNair Road, Stop 10G, 
Annapolis, MD 21402 (attn: Prof. J. E. Shade).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Prof. J. E. Shade, Associate Director 
of Research and Scholarship for Technology Transfer, Academic Dean and 
Provost Office, 589 McNair Road, Stop 10G, Annapolis, MD 21402, office: 
410-293-2509. Due to U.S. Postal delays, please fax 410-293-2507 and 
send email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c0b3a8a1a4a580b5b3aea1eea5a4b5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f2819a939697b287819c93dc979687">[email protected]</span></a>. Use courier delivery to expedite 
response.

    Authority: 35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR part 404.

N. A. Hagerty-Ford,
Commander, Office of the Judge Advocate General, U.S. Navy, Federal 
Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-06788 Filed 3-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 10.4

July 27, 2009

Cheryl D.
Hodges
100 E. RiverCenter Blvd.
Suite 1600
Covington, KY 41011

Re:     Temporary
Salary Reduction Program

Dear Cheryl:

As
you know, Omnicare is implementing a temporary salary reduction program. During
the period of Omnicares temporary salary reduction program, your regular base
salary will be reduced by five percent (5%) from its current level. This
reduction in your regular base salary will become effective as of July 16,
2009.

The
salary reduction does not constitute a breach of, or a failure by Omnicare or
any of its affiliates to observe or perform any of their obligations under,
your employment agreement with Omnicare, dated August 4, 1988 (the Employment
Agreement) or any other agreement you may have with Omnicare or any of its
affiliates. The salary reduction will have no effect on the validity or
enforceability of any provision of the Employment Agreement or any other
agreement that you may have with Omnicare or any of its affiliates.
Notwithstanding anything in this letter to the contrary, for purposes of
determining (i) the severance payable pursuant to Section 3.4 of the Employment
Agreement, (ii) the amount of compensation under the Excess Pension Benefit
portion of the Excess Benefit Plan and the Excess Savings Benefit portion of
the Excess Benefit Plan and (iii) your benefits under any other employee
benefit plan of Omnicare or any of its affiliates, your base salary shall be
determined without application of the salary reduction set forth above.

Nothing
in this letter constitutes an admission by Omnicare or any of its affiliates
that your consent is required to reduce your regular base salary under the
terms of the Employment Agreement or otherwise. If and to the extent necessary,
however, this letter modifies the Employment Agreement to reflect the foregoing
temporary salary reduction.

---



Please
execute and return this letter to show your acknowledgment of and agreement to
the foregoing. We appreciate your efforts on behalf of Omnicare.

|                                |                     
|------------------------------- | --------------------
|                                | Sincerely,          
|                                |                     
|                                | /s/ Mark G.
 Kobasuk
|                                |                     
|                                | Mark G. Kobasuk     
|                                |                     
|                                |                     
|                                |                     
|Agreed and
 accepted:           |                     
|                                |                     
|/s/ Cheryl
 D. Hodges           |                     
|Employee                        |                     
|Printed
 Name: Cheryl D. Hodges |                     
|Date: July
 27, 2009            |                     

---
# C_2014225EN.01000102.xml

| 16.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 225/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 225/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7287 — CD&R Fund IX/Mauser)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2014/C 225/02)

On 8 July 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7287. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7287. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
The Honorable William G. Cambridge, Chief Judge, United

1

States District Court for the District of Nebraska. 

___________

No. 95-3790

___________

Norma E. Lohse, *

 *

Appellant, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * District of Nebraska.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Co., * [UNPUBLISHED]

a Delaware Corporation, *

 *

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: July 5, 1996

 Filed: July 30, 1996

___________

Before McMILLIAN, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Norma E. Lohse appeals from the judgment of the district court1

entered upon a jury verdict for defendant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., in

Lohse's negligence action. Because Lohse has not provided a transcript,

we cannot review the issues she raises on appeal. See Fed. R. App. P.

10(b)(2); Schmid v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners, 827 F.2d 384, 386

(8th Cir. 1987) (per curiam), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1071 (1988). 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. We deny

Lohse's and Wal-Mart's motions on appeal.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
# C_2014160EN.01002001.xml

| 27.5.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 160/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 160/20

---

Training of national judges in EU competition law and judicial cooperation between national judges

(2014/C 160/10)

A new call for proposals on training of national judges in EU competition law and judicial cooperation between national judges has been published on: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/calls/proposals_open.html

Deadline for application: 29 August 2014.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

    As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of
our reports included in this Annual Report on Amendment No. 3 to Form 10-K, into
the Company's previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File
Nos. 033-75934, 333-04280, 333-08047, 333-75339 and 333-43802) and Form S-3
(File Nos. 333-05939, 333-37921, 333-87157 and 333-94859).

                                          /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
May 23, 2001
**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONI, Yorgen H. Edholm, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of I-many, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: November 7, 2005       /S/ YORGEN H. EDHOLM         Yorgen H. Edholm    President and Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7159

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

GLENN LEE WILLIAMS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior 

District Judge. (5:95-cr-00136-F-3)

Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 22, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Glenn Lee Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Glenn Lee Williams appeals the district court’s order denying 

his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction. 

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. United States v. Williams, No. 5:95-cr-00136-F-3 (E.D.N.C. 

July 14, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 251 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 251

To provide that for purposes of determining compliance with title IX of 
the Education Amendments of 1972 in athletics, sex shall be recognized 
 based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 4, 2021

  Mr. Lee (for himself, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Cotton, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. 
Marshall, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Cruz, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Tuberville, 
 Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Ms. Ernst, Mrs. Capito, and Mr. Paul) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that for purposes of determining compliance with title IX of 
the Education Amendments of 1972 in athletics, sex shall be recognized 
 based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protection of Women and Girls in 
Sports Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT.

    Section 901 of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(d)(1) It shall be a violation of subsection (a) for a recipient 
of Federal funds who operates, sponsors, or facilitates athletic 
programs or activities to permit a person whose sex is male to 
participate in an athletic program or activity that is designated for 
women or girls.
    ``(2) For purposes of this subsection, sex shall be recognized 
based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at 
birth.''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2015108EN.01000201.xml

| 31.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

30 March 2015

(2015/C 108/02)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0845 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 130,02 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4690 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,73280 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3207 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0439 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,6545 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,473 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 299,83 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0938 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4050 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,8265 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4158 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3709 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,4100 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,4417 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4898 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 201,04 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,1446 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 6,7324 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6448 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 172,71 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,0246 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 48,527 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 62,5595 |
| THB | Thai baht | 35,328 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,5616 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,5321 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 67,9180 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0845

JPY

Japanese yen

130,02

DKK

Danish krone

7,4690

GBP

Pound sterling

0,73280

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3207

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0439

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,6545

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,473

HUF

Hungarian forint

299,83

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0938

RON

Romanian leu

4,4050

TRY

Turkish lira

2,8265

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4158

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3709

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,4100

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,4417

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4898

KRW

South Korean won

1 201,04

ZAR

South African rand

13,1446

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

6,7324

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6448

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 172,71

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,0246

PHP

Philippine peso

48,527

RUB

Russian rouble

62,5595

THB

Thai baht

35,328

BRL

Brazilian real

3,5616

MXN

Mexican peso

16,5321

INR

Indian rupee

67,9180

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PAMELA CHYBA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

WASHINGTON MUTUAL, AKA 

JPMorgan Chase & Co.,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 14-56082

D.C. No. 3:12-cv-00838-JAHBLM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 16, 2016**

Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. 

Pamela Chyba appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in her action 

alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”). We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Lyon v. Chase Bank 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

NOV 23 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 14-56082 

USA, N.A., 656 F.3d 877, 883 (9th Cir. 2011) (motion for judgment on the 

pleadings); Doe v. Abbott Labs., 571 F.3d 930, 933 (9th Cir. 2009) (motion to 

dismiss). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Henry v. Gill

Indus., Inc., 983 F.2d 943, 950 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm. 

Dismissal of Chyba’s FCRA claims was proper because Chyba failed to 

exhaust the claims before filing suit in district court as required by the Financial 

Institutions, Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”). See 

12 U.S.C. § 1821(d); Rundgren v. Wash. Mut. Bank, FA, 760 F.3d 1056, 1060-

61 (9th Cir. 2014) (no jurisdiction exists over claims not properly exhausted

through FIRREA’s administrative process).

We reject as without merit Chyba’s contention that the district court’s denial 

of her motion for in camera review violated her due process rights. 

Washington Mutual’s request for judicial notice, filed on March 30, 2015, is 

granted.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 21


              SUBSIDIARIES OF APPLE RESIDENTIAL INCOME TRUST, INC.

     Apple owns all of the outstanding shares (consisting,  in each case, of 100
common  shares)  of Apple  General,  Inc.,  a  Virginia  corporation,  and Apple
Limited, Inc., a Virginia corporation.

     Apple General, Inc. is the sole general partner of (with a 1% interest in),
and Apple Limited, Inc. is the sole limited partner of (with a 99% interest in),
each of the following Virginia limited partnerships:

     Apple REIT Limited Partnership
     Apple REIT II Limited Partnership
     Apple REIT III Limited Partnership
     Apple REIT IV Limited Partnership
     Apple REIT V Limited Partnership
     Apple REIT VI Limited Partnership
     Apple REIT VII Limited Partnership