alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON 

TRUDY MORRIS, : Case No. 3:17-cv-318 

 : 

 Plaintiff, : Judge Thomas M. Rose 

: Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz 

v. : 

 : 

PINES PET CEMETERY, INC., : ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

: MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

: AND DAMAGES PURSUANT TO 

 Defendant. : RULE 55(B)(2) 

 Plaintiff, Trudy Morris, filed this action on September 13, 2017. (Doc. 1). The complaint 

alleged violations of ERISA and FLSA, tort claims, retaliation and improper wage withholding 

under Ohio statutory law. 

Defendant, Pines Pet Cemetery, Inc., was properly served with the summons and 

complaint on September 29, 2017 (Doc. 5), and has not appeared or otherwise plead. The clerk 

entered default against Defendant on November 16, 2017. (Doc. 7). Pending before this Court is 

the Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment and Damages Pursuant to Rule 55(b)(2). The 

motion is supported by Plaintiff’s affidavit detailing the basis for her request for damages and the 

affidavit of Plaintiff’s attorney Jeffrey M. Silverstein regarding the amount sought for attorney’s 

fees. 

The Court finds that the record before the Court, including Plaintiff’s written motion, her 

complaint and the attached exhibits are sufficient to determine the amount of damages that 

should be awarded to Plaintiff. Plaintiff is entitled to recover unpaid wages in the amount of 

$12,141.82, calculated by determining wages due and not paid. The Court finds that Plaintiff’s 

request for attorney’s fees of $7,327.50 and costs of $502.80, as detailed in the affidavit of 
2 

 

Jeffrey M. Silverstein, is both reasonable and that the fees are within the ranges of fees routinely 

awarded in this district. 

The Court also concludes that Plaintiff should be awarded liquidated damages in the 

amount equal to the amount of unpaid wages due to Defendant’s willful violations of the FLSA, 

ERISA and Ohio statutes. 

The Court further awards punitive damages in the amount roughly equivalent to triple 

Plaintiff’s economic damages in the sum of $36,425.46. 

 For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby enters judgment in favor of Plaintiff, 

Trudy Morris, and against Defendant, Pines Pet Cemetery, Inc., in the total amount of 

$68,539.40. 

IT IS SO ORDERED 

 

 Judge Thomas M. Rose 

Date:
May 1 5 , 20 12



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 12

- 00 298

- CR
EX PARTE BERNARD MARIO CLARK

____________________
T oday, t he Court considered the State’s motion to dismiss the appeal as frivolous and found it meritorious. The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS in accordance with its opinion. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 498.0045. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant if he is not indigent

. We further order this decision certified below for observance

.
Interim Decision #3345 

### In re E-L-H- et al., Respondents Decided January 30, 1998 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals

Precedent decisions of the Board of Immigration Appeals which have been certified to the Attorney General for review are binding on the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Immigration Judges and continue to serve as precedent in all proceedings involving the same issue or issues unless or until they are modified or overruled by the Board or the Attorney General.
Pro se Scott M. Rosen, Appellate Counsel, for the Immigration and Naturalization Service Before: Board Panel: DUNNE, Vice Chairman; VACCA and VILLAGELIU, Board Members. DUNNE, Vice Chairman: The Immigration and Naturalization Service has filed a motion to reconsider our ruling of August 29, 1997, which reversed the ImmigrationJudge’s decision to deny the respondents asylum and withholding of deportation under sections 208 and 243(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158 and 1253(h)(1994). We have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 3.2(a)(1997). The motion will be denied. The Service argued in its motion that the Board’s reliance on Matter of C-Y-Z-, 21 I&N Dec. 915 (BIA 1997), in our August 29, 1997, decision was improper. It contends that because Matter of C-Y-Z- has been certified to the Attorney General, the Board should not have relied on it as a precedent in deciding the instant case. The Service cited Matter of Farias, 21 I&N Dec. 269 (BIA 1996, 1997; A.G. 1997), for the proposition that a decision of the Board is not final while it is under Attorney General review. We have carefully considered the arguments and authority cited by the Service. We agree with the Service that Board decisions are final except in those cases reviewed by the Attorney General. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 3.1(d)(2), (h)(1997), However, “[e]xcept as they may be modified or overruled by the Board or the Attorney General, decisions of the Board shall be binding on all officers and employees of the Service or Immigration Judges in the administration of the Act, and selected decisions designated by the Board shall serve as precedents in all proceedings involving the same issue or issues.” 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(g).
21Interim Decision #3345
We find that although Matter of C-Y-Z- , supra , has been certified to the Attorney General for review, the decision remains binding unless or until it is modified or overruled by the Board or the Attorney General. See 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(g), We therefore conclude that our reliance on Matter of C-Y-Z- was proper. Accordingly, the Service’s motion will be denied. 

### ORDER: The motion to reconsider is denied.

22
ex107.htm












 


January 15, 2009


 







 


To:


 


Bill Morgan


24304-55th Ave


Langley, BC


V6V 1K4


Canada







 


Re:           Letter of Intent


 


Dear Mr. Morgan;


 


The purpose of this letter is to set forth the mutual intentions of North Bay Resources Inc. (“North Bay”) and Bill Morgan (“Morgan”) with respect to a proposed joint-venture regarding North Bay’s Fraser River Platinum placer property, near Lytton, British Columbia  (the “JV Property”), of which North Bay presently holds a 100% undivided interest.


 


It is the intent of the parties that the Proposed Transaction would be preceded by and contingent on the terms and conditions set forth below:


 


1. Morgan will conduct due diligence by visiting the JV Property to assess the mineralization and general environment by way of a short work program.  North Bay expressly grants permission to Morgan to enter the property for the purpose of conducting said due diligence until July 31, 2009.


 


2. Bill Morgan shall be responsible for all expenses related to said work program.  Bill Morgan shall further be responsible for filing any and all work permits required by the Province of British Columbia, including notification of work in compliance with the Act to any parties holding title to the surface rights on or adjacent to the JV Property, and in compliance with the Act will consult with any affected First Nations in the immediate area.


 


 




  





1











  






 


 


3. At the conclusion of the work program, Bill Morgan will issue a report which North Bay can then file as a statement of work with the Mineral Titles Branch of British Columbia’s Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources (MEMPR) via the Mineral Titles Online (MTO) system.  All expenditures by Morgan will be documented and applied toward the MEMPR work requirements on the JV Property.


 


4. Bill Morgan shall determine no later than July 31, 2009 whether he wishes to proceed with the proposed transaction.


 







 


The terms and conditions of this letter are set forth only to describe our mutual present intentions as reflected in our conversations regarding the Proposed Transaction and are not intended to create any binding obligations on the part of North Bay or Bill Morgan or to be construed as an agreement to enter into any binding agreements.  No such obligations shall arise unless and until there shall have been prepared, executed and delivered definitive written agreements acceptable in form to both parties setting forth such terms and such additional understandings as North Bay and Bill Morgan may develop in the course of their negotiations leading up to such agreements.


 


If you concur that this letter correctly sets forth our mutual intentions, please indicate your acceptance and approval of the letter in the space provided below.


 


Very truly yours,


 


North Bay Resources Inc.


 







 


By  /s/ Perry Leopold                           


 


Perry Leopold, CEO


 


ACCEPTED AND APPROVED


 


Bill Morgan


 







 


By  /s/ Bill Morgan                                                   


 


Bill Morgan


 


 




  





2
----

| (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:   November 14, 2012 | By:    | /s/  Kyle Kennedy                                                                                                            |   |
|--------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                 |   | Kyle Kennedy                                                                                                                      |   |
|                                 |   | President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board(Principal Executive Officer and acting Principal Accounting Officer) |   |
Case: 2:17-mj-00548-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/25/17 Page: 1 of 8  PAGEID #: 1

Case: 2:17-mj-00548-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/25/17 Page: 2 of 8  PAGEID #: 2

Case: 2:17-mj-00548-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/25/17 Page: 3 of 8  PAGEID #: 3

Case: 2:17-mj-00548-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/25/17 Page: 4 of 8  PAGEID #: 4

Case: 2:17-mj-00548-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/25/17 Page: 5 of 8  PAGEID #: 5

Case: 2:17-mj-00548-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/25/17 Page: 6 of 8  PAGEID #: 6

Case: 2:17-mj-00548-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/25/17 Page: 7 of 8  PAGEID #: 7

Case: 2:17-mj-00548-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/25/17 Page: 8 of 8  PAGEID #: 8
ex10_1.htm







 


June 8, 2010


 


Mr. Vincent J. Franzone


AMERICAN BIO FUELS, LLC


56 West 45th Street


New York, NY 10036


 







On May 21, 2010 Goldspan Resources, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“GSPN”) and American Bio Fuels, LLC (“ABF”), entered into an LOI for the acquisition of Able NY by GSPN. GSPN and ABF shall be collectively referred to herein as the “Parties”.


 


The initial LOI provided for the issuance of convertible notes and common shares of GSPN in amounts and numbers to be determined.


 


During the due diligence period the Parties were to evaluate Able NY. Since the initial LOI the Parties have hereby agreed that the acquisition by GSPN will be solely for restricted common shares and there will be no debt or cash required for the Acquisition.


 


Further, as a requirement of the LOI for Able NY to obtain audited financial statements for the two years ended June 30, 2010 Able NY has engaged Silberstein Ungar, PLLC the auditors currently being used by Goldspan.


 


Further, the Parties acknowledge that this LOI may be provided to the SEC in the form of an 8-K filing. Both Parties shall agree to any public statement or press release by mutual consent with the understanding that the Parties agree that a press release shall be made once the Form 8-K announcing the execution of this letter of intent has been filed. Board of Directors approval of GSPN shall be provided prior to the filing of the 8-K.


 


This revised letter of intent shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, without giving effect to the principles of conflicts of law thereof.


 


If the foregoing correctly states the general understanding that has been reached between us, please so indicate by signing in the space provided and returning one of the enclosed letters to us.


 


Sincerely,


 







Goldspan Resources, Inc.


 


By /s/ Leon Caldwell


Leon Caldwell, President


 







ACCEPTED AND AGREED


 







American Bio Fuels, LLC


 







/s/ Vincent J. Franzone


Vincent J. Franzone, President
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4188 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4188

    To authorize appropriations for brownfields site assessment and 
                    cleanup, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 2, 2009

Mr. Sestak (for himself, Mr. Pallone, and Mr. Grijalva) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
   Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and 
   Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To authorize appropriations for brownfields site assessment and 
                    cleanup, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Brownfield Cleanup Enhancement 
Act''.

SEC. 2. BROWNFIELDS SITE ASSESSMENT AND CLEANUP.

    Section 104(k)(12) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(k)(12)) is 
amended to read as follows:
            ``(12) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
        authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
        $350,000,000 for fiscal year 2010, $400,000,000 for fiscal year 
        2011, $450,000,000 for fiscal year 2012, $500,000,000 for 
        fiscal year 2013, $550,000,000 for fiscal year 2014, and 
        $600,000,000 for fiscal year 2015 and each fiscal year 
        thereafter.''.

SEC. 3. STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS.

    Section 128(a)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9628(a)(3)) is 
amended to read as follows:
            ``(3) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        carry out this subsection $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2010, 
        $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2011, $90,000,000 for fiscal year 
        2012, $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2013, $110,000,000 for 
        fiscal year 2014, and $120,000,000 for fiscal year 2015 and 
        each fiscal year thereafter.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.38
  
   Consideration
 At-will Employment
 Scope of Agreement e.g., this
 Separation Benefits .
 Severance Pay
 Outplacement Services




---



##### 



Page 2 of 5 The provision of certain Employee Benefits
 Definition of Base Salary
 Definition of Cause




---



##### 



Page 3 of 5   Definition of Without Cause
 No Obligations Hereunder If Your Employment Is Terminated For Cause
 Notices
 Successors; Binding Agreement
   No Waiver or Modification
 Payment of Final Pay




---



##### 



Page 4 of 5 Entire Agreement
 Severability; Validity
 Governing Law and Jurisdiction
 Employment Taxes
 Covenant Not to Compete
 Section 409A Compliance
 Precedence




---



##### 



Page 5 of 5 Counterparts
  Very truly yours,TOLLGRADE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.By:
    
    /s/Joseph FerraraName:
    
    Joseph FerraraTitle:
    
    CEO & PresidentDate:
    
    11/17/09AGREED:/s/Jennifer M. ReinkeJennifer M. ReinkeDate:
    
    11/17/09
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, Mitchell H. Gold, M.D., the Chief Executive Officer of Dendreon Corporation
(the Company), and Martin A. Simonetti, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



| | 1. | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the Periodic Report),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the
Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Periodic Report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: May 10, 2004



|                                               |  |  |  |                                            
|---------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------
|                                               |  | 
|/s/    MITCHELL H. GOLD, M.D.                  |  |  |  | /s/    MARTIN A. SIMONETTI                 
|                                               |  |  |  |                                            
|Mitchell H. Gold, M.D. Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Martin A. Simonetti Chief Financial Officer
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 02-3648

___________

Earnest Conrod, Jr. *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

United States Bureau of Prisons; *

Angela Simmons, Unit Manager, * Appeal from the United States

Atwater Federal Prison; Iris Guidry, * District Court for the Eastern 

BOP Unit Manager, Milan, MI; * District of Arkansas.

Wardell Chamber, BOP Unit *

Counselor, Jonesville, VA; Derek * [UNPUBLISHED]

Edge, Lt., FCI - Memphis; L. *

Driscoll, Duty Officer, FCI - Forrest *

City; Melvin Smith, Captain, *

FCI - Forrest City; Jeff Smith, *

Unit Manager - FCI - Texarkana, TX, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: February 26, 2003

 Filed: March 3, 2003

___________

Before BYE, FAGG, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
-2-

Federal inmate Earnest Conrod appeals the district court’s pre-service dismissal

of his civil action. The district court found that Conrod had failed to state a

constitutional claim. Having reviewed the record de novo, see Cooper v. Schriro, 189

F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam), we conclude dismissal of Conrod’s

constitutional claims was proper. We believe, however, that Conrod sufficiently

stated a Privacy Act claim against the Bureau of Prisons, see 5 U.S.C. § 552a; Sellers

v. Bureau of Prisons, 959 F.2d 307, 312 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (if agency willfully or

intentionally makes adverse determination based on records that are not maintained

with “such accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and completeness as is reasonably

necessary,” agency will be liable for money damages), and that this claim warrants

remand for service of process. On remand Conrod should be given the opportunity

to amend his complaint to include a tort claim: his filings indicate he may have been

attempting to present such a claim, and a letter attached to his complaint suggests that

he has exhausted his administrative remedies under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28

U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680. Accordingly, we affirm in part and remand for further

proceedings. We deny Conrod’s pending motion. 

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1852

JOHN M. DICKSON, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JUDGE BRYANT L. SUGG, Newport News Circuit Court 7th 

Judicial Court of Virginia As an “enterprise” for RICO 

purposes Acting as a person and member of a criminal 

enterprise Under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt 

Organizations Act; FORMER JUDGE MR. HOWARD VINCENT CONWAY, 

JR., Of the Newport News Circuit Court Formerly of 7th 

Judicial Court of Virginia As an “enterprise” for RICO 

purposes Acting as a person and member of a criminal 

enterprise Under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt 

Organizations (RICO); COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY MR. THOMAS C. 

DANIEL, Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office For the city of 

Newport News Acting as a person and member of a criminal 

enterprise Under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt 

Organizations Act (RICO); CITY OF NEWPORT NEWS VIRGINIA, As 

an “enterprise” for RICO purposes Acting as a person and 

member of a criminal enterprise Under the Racketeer 

Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO); CITY OF 

NEWPORT NEWS VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT, Acting as a person 

and member of a criminal enterprise Under the Racketeer 

Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO); MR. R. DEAN 

BARKER, CSAT for, Hampton/Newport News. C.I.T./Jail Services 

Coordinator Acting as a person and member of a criminal 

enterprise Under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt 

Organizations Act (RICO),

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Arenda L. Wright Allen, 

District Judge. (4:15-cv-00050-AWA-DEM)
2

Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 19, 2015

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John M. Dickson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

John M. Dickson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his civil complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) (2012). We have reviewed the record 

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. Dickson v. Sugg, No. 

4:15-cv-00050-AWA-DEM (E.D. Va. July 2, 2015). 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