alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 97-3270EA

_____________ Ray Antwane Higgins, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Arkansas. * City of Little Rock; Louie Caudell, * [UNPUBLISHED] Chief of Police; John Does, * * Appellees. *

_____________ Submitted: March 19, 1998

Filed: March 26, 1998

_____________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Ray Antwan e Higgins brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against the City of Little Rock (City), police chief Lou ie Caudell, and a number of John Does. He claims his arrest by Little Rock police officers violated his constitutional rights, and the City and Caudell failed adequately to train and supervise the officers. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the City and Caudell. Higgins appeals, and we affirm.-2-

We do no t believe the district court abused its discretion in denying Higgins' s second and third mot

ions to amend his complaint to reflect the true names of the John Does. See S anders v. Clemco Indus. , 823 F.2d 214, 216 (8th Cir. 1987) (standard of review). We also conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding the matter was ripe for summary judgment, despite Hi ggins's plea for additional discovery. See Dulany v. Carnahan , 132 F.3d 1234, 1238 (8th Cir. 1997) (standard of review ; non-movant asserting need for further discovery must "show what specific facts further discovery m

ight unveil"). Finally, the district court's grant of summary judgment was proper b ecause Higgins's conclusory affidavits and pleadings were insufficient t o withstand summary judgment. SeeFed. R. Civ. P. 56(e); C ity of Canton v. Harris , 489 U.S. 378, 388-90 (1989) (municipal liabili ty for failure to train or supervise); Andrews v. Fowle r , 98 F.3d 1069, 1078 (8th Cir. 1996) (individual liability for supervisor' s failure to train or supervise). Accordingly, we affirm the distric t court's judgment and deny as moot Higgins's motion for appointment of counsel. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-19-0000211

21-APR-2020

08:54 AM
The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., United States District Judge for th e 1 Western District of Missouri.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-2225

___________ Denny R. Hardin, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Basil Porter; Kansas City Auto * [UNPUBLISHED] Auction; Manheim Corporation, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: September 4, 1998 Filed: September 9, 1998

___________ Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Denny R. Hardin appeals the district court & s dismissal of his lawsuit asserting 1 c l aims of civil rights violations and employment discrimination, together with related st ate law claims. After careful review of the record and the parties & briefs, we affirm the dismissal of the federal claimsfor the reasons stated by the district court. We also affirm the dismissal without prejudice, under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, of the supplementa l state law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d) (tolling period of limitations for state law-2-

claim s while claims are pending and for 30 days after dismissal or longer period i f provided by state law). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Case No. 3:18CR060 

 

 Plaintiff, : Judge Thomas M. Rose 

 

 v. : 

KENNETH STOPKOTTE, : 

 

 Defendant. : 

AGREED ORDER TO PAY $180 TO CLERK OF COURTS TO BE APPLIED TO 

DEFENDANT KENNETH STOPKOTTE’S ORDER FOR RESTITUTION 

 Upon the Motion of the United States to enter this Agreed Order, and the Court’s review 

of the evidence in the record, including the Plea Agreement, the Court HEREBY FINDS THAT: 

1. The agency seized $674.72 from the Defendant on April 18, 2018. 

2. On May 31, 2018, the Defendant pled guilty to Count Two of the Indictment, charging 

him with Uttering Counterfeit Obligations of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 472. 

(Doc. 15.) 

3. In the Plea Agreement, the Defendant agreed to the forfeiture, pursuant to 

18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(B), of all property constituting, or derived from, proceeds obtained 

directly or indirectly, as a result of his offense alleged in Count Two of the Indictment, which 

included $492.72 in genuine United States currency. (Doc. 15.) 
2 

4. Further, the Defendant and the United States agreed that of the $674.72 seized from the 

Defendant, the sum of $492.74 would be forfeited and the remainder, $180.00, would be 

“conveyed to the Court for the purposes of applying the $180.00 towards Defendant’s Special 

Assessment ($100) and restitution obligations in this case”. (Doc. 15.) 

5. After the Plea Agreement was entered, not knowing that the United States had agreed in 

the Plea Agreement to apply the $180.00 to the Special Assessment or Restitution, the agency 

administratively forfeited the entire $674.72 on August 31, 2018. 

6. The Defendant was sentenced on September 5, 2018. (Doc. 21). The Judgment ordered 

the forfeiture of the $492.72, a $100 Special Assessment and $820.00 in Restitution to 

“Professional Sport Catering”. (Id.) 

7. The Defendant has not paid the Special Assessment of $100.00 nor the Restitution in the 

amount of $820 to Professional Sport Catering. Both amounts remain due and owing in full. 

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

8. The administrative forfeiture of $180.00 of the $674.72 shall be vacated. 

9. The remaining $492.72 of the $674.72 forfeited administratively shall remain unaffected 

by this order. 

10. The agency shall forward the amount of $180.00 to the Clerk of Court. 

11. The $180.00 shall be applied to the Defendant’s Restitution in the amount of $820.00 

owed to Professional Sports Catering. 

// 

// 
3 

12. The Defendant shall pay the Special Assessment of $100.00 out of his own funds. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 19, 2018 

 *s/Thomas M. Rose 

 __________________________________ 

 THOMAS M. ROSE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

 

BENJAMIN C. GLASSMAN 

United States Attorney 

Southern District of Ohio 

s/Vipal J. Patel________________ 

VIPAL J. PATEL 

First Assistant United States Attorney 

s/F. Arthur Mullins, per email authorization 10/31/18______ 

F. ARTHUR MULLINS 

Assistant Federal Public Defender
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

ODYSSEY MARINE EXPLORATION, INC.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB/A of Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. for the period ending December 31, 2004:



(1) 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of Odyssey Marine
Exploration, Inc.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Michael J. Holmes  
|Michael J. Holmes      
|Chief Financial Officer
|June 17, 2005          



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. and will be retained by Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ANTOINE WARD,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 269 WAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 19th day of December, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
AO 450 (Rev. 11/11) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

u the plaintiff (name) recover from the

defendant (name) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes prejudgment

interest at the rate of %, plus post judgment interest at the rate of % per annum, along with costs.

u the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

.

u other:

.

This action was (check one):

u tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has

rendered a verdict.

u tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

u decided by Judge on a motion for

.

Date: CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

7/26/19

 Southern District of Ohio

Shauna Crockett-Johnson

3:18-cv-219

Commissioner of Social Security

✔ Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant; case is remanded to the commissioner under the

fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C.§405(g) for further proceedings

✔ Michael J. Newman

Decision and Entry
SW-846 Update V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS - 1 Revision 1 

 July 2014 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

The Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) thanks the following 

organizations and groups, whose individual’s efforts, assistance and advice in the preparation 

of this manual were invaluable: 

 U.S. E.P.A. Regions I - X 

 U.S. E.P.A./ORCR Staff 

 U.S. E.P.A. SW-846 Work Groups 

 All Method Development Chemists/Teams 

 The Cadmus Group, Inc. 

 Commercial Scientific Firms, both Laboratory and Instrument 

Manufacturers 

 Department of Defense 

 Laboratory Technical Information Group (LTIG) 

 National Enforcement Investigation Center (NEIC) 

 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 

 Office of Research and Development (ORD) 

 Participating Universities 

 Research Triangle Park (RTP) 

 State Regulatory Agencies
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 26, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 133159 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 133159 COA: 271018 Wayne CC: 01-010303 EUGENE PAUL SIWIK, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the December 27, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

d0618 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.

June 26, 2007

Clerk
COMMISSIONERS GABRIELJ. RAMOS DlSTRlCT 1 BRETT .A. KASTEN DISTRICT 2 RON HALL DlSTRICT 3 August 18, 2014 Kevin Schlemmer, Chief, Essential Air Service & Domestic Analysis Division 

### GRANT COUNTY

United States Dept. ofTransportation 1200NewJerseyAve SE Washington, DC 20590 Re: Essential Air Service for Grant County, NewMexico DearMr. Schlemmer: COUNTY MANAGER JON PAUL SAAR!. Telephone: (575) 574-0008 Fax: (575} 574-0073

I am writing in regard to the Essential Air Service (EAS) funding that is provided for our rural community. The EAS funding is vital to our community, and Grant County greatly appreciates the EAS assistance. Based on feedback from Grant Countyresidents, our local hospital, and local officials, Ibelieve that ourcommunitywouldbenefit andpreferthat there be a flight route from Silver City, NMto either Albuquerque or Santa Fe, NM. Currently, the flight to Phoenix is not veryuseful to arural community such as ours, whose residents regularly need to travel to Northern New Mexico for governmental matters, economic opportunities, healthcare services, and for general quality of life. The flight to Phoenix, unfortunately, has failed to meet the needs of our isolated community. Grant County is requesting that when awarding the next EAS contract, you will take into consideration our communities needs and select an airline that provides a flight to Albuquerque or SantaFe. Please feel free to contactmewith any questions.

Office Of The (-;rant County Commissioners 1400 Highway 130 East, Silver City, NM 88061 "' P. 0. Box 898, Silver City, NM H8062
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Universal Health Realty Income Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Charles F. Boyle, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Trust, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



(i) the Report
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Trust at the end of, and for the period covered by the Report.



/s/ Charles F. BoyleVice President and Chief Financial Officer March 12, 2004




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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. IN17-4-000]

                    With respect to an order issued by the Commission on December 16, 2021, in the above-captioned docket, with the exceptions noted below, the staff of the Office of Enforcement are designated as non-decisional in deliberations by the Commission in this docket.[1]                                          Accordingly, pursuant to 18 CFR 385.2202 (2021), they will not serve as advisors to the Commission or take part in the Commission's review of any offer of settlement. Likewise, as non-decisional staff, pursuant to 18 CFR 385.2201 (2021), they are prohibited from communicating with advisory staff concerning any deliberations in this docket.                

Exceptions to this designation as non-decisional are:

Serrita Hill

Seema K. Jain

Grace Kwon

Gabriel Sterling

Dated: January 21, 2022.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

# Footnotes

1.                                                     *Rover Pipeline, LLC and Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.,*                         177 FERC ¶ 61,182 (2021).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2022-01679 Filed 1-27-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 37 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 37

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
 United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Health 
    and Human Services relating to ``Securing Updated and Necessary 
                    Statutory Evaluations Timely''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2021

Mr. Krishnamoorthi (for himself and Ms. Eshoo) submitted the following 
  joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
 United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Health 
    and Human Services relating to ``Securing Updated and Necessary 
                    Statutory Evaluations Timely''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Department of Health and Human Services relating 
to ``Securing Updated and Necessary Statutory Evaluations Timely'' (86 
Fed. Reg. 5694; published January 19, 2021), and such rule shall have 
no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
#### Morrison v Wayne County,

No. 91964;

Court of Appeals No. 140368.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 19 (Friday, January 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 4575]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01753]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 3472-024]


Aspinook Hydro, LLC; Notice of Waiver Period for Water Quality 
Certification Application

    On December 3, 2021, Aspinook Hydro, LLC. submitted to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) evidence of its application 
for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality certification 
filed with Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental 
Protection (Connecticut DEEP), in conjunction with the above captioned 
project. Pursuant to section 401 of the Clean Water Act \1\ and section 
4.34(b)(5), 5.23(b), 153.4, or 157.22 of the Commission's 
regulations,\2\ a state certifying agency is deemed to have waived its 
certifying authority if it fails or refuses to act on a certification 
request within a reasonable period of time, which is one year after the 
date the certification request was received. Accordingly, we hereby 
notify the Connecticut DEEP of the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).
    \2\ 18 CFR 4.34(b)(5)/5.23(b)/153.4/157.22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Date that Connecticut DEEP Received the Certification Request: 
December 3, 2021.
    If Connecticut DEEP fails or refuses to act on the water quality 
certification request on or before December 3, 2022, then the agency 
certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of 
the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).

    Dated: January 24, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-01753 Filed 1-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Case: 1:18-cv-00412-MWM-KLL Doc #: 25 Filed: 02/20/19 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 456
Laura KERR, Petitioner, v. Lewis T. WALLER, Respondent.

Case No. 2D17-878

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

WCR, INCORPORATED,

Plaintiff, Case Nos. 3:18-cv-278, 3:20cv143

vs.

WESTERN CANADA PLATE District Judge Michael J. Newman

EXCHANGER LTD., et al., Magistrate Judge Carolyn H. Gentry

Defendants.

______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER CONDITIONALLY DISMISSING THESE CASES

______________________________________________________________________________

The Court, having been advised that the parties have settled these two cases, ORDERS

these cases DISMISSED, provided that either party may, upon good cause shown within sixty 

(60) days, reopen these cases if settlement is not consummated. In the event the parties need 

assistance in finalizing the settlement, they should file a motion seeking the Court’s assistance.

The Court expresses its sincere gratitude to United States Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. 

Vascura for her dedicated work as mediator in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

October 7, 2022 s/Michael J. Newman

Hon. Michael J. Newman

United States District Judge

cc: U.S. Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura

Case: 3:18-cv-00278-MJN-CHG Doc #: 81 Filed: 10/07/22 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 1013
Albert Daniel PLATT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2964

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 17, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
10.8

     

    January
26, 2009

    


    Floyd
Warkol, Chief Executive Officer

    KSW,
INC.

    37-16
23rd Street

    Long
Island City, NY 11101

    


    Dear Mr.
Warkol:

    


    Bank of
America, N.A. is pleased to renew the availability period for your Two Million
and 00/100 Dollars ($2,000,000.00) revolving line of credit documented by
Facility No. 1 of the Loan Agreement dated April 1, 2007 (including any previous
amendments, the “Agreement”).

    


    Effective
as of the current Expiration Date of April 1, 2009, the availability period
shall be extended and shall expire on the new Expiration Date of April 1, 2010.
All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.

    


    I also
want to take this opportunity to thank you for your business. I believe we can
continue to provide your company with the same high level of customer service
and expertise.

    


    If you
have any questions, please contact your Client Manager, Victoria Scolaro at
(631) 547-7720.

    


    Bank of
America, N.A.

    


    
      	
              By:

            	
                   

            	
              /s/
      Diane
      Phillip                                                 

            	
                                                                                                     

            
	 
      	 
      	
              Diane
      Phillip, Document Administrator
<PAGE>

                                                              Exhibit 23.3

BERNARDO VILLEGAS PEREZ
CONTADOR PUBLICO
MATRICULA 4962-A


January 21, 1999


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITOR

I hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Company's amended
Annual Report on Form 10K-A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998 of my
report dated March 15, 1996 appearing on page F-2 and F-3 of American
International Petroleum Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 1995.


/s/ Bernardo Villegas Perez
------------------------------
Bernardo Villegas Perez
Auditor
Professional Card No. 4962-A