alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Benedict EMESOWUM, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Adam ZELDES; John Doe; City of San Antonio; Grant Ruedemann, Defendants-Appellees

No. 16-50906 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed September 15, 2017

Benedict Emesowum, Pro Se

*387Nathan Mark Ralls, Hoblit Darling Ralls Hernandez & Hudlow, L.L.P., San Antonio, TX, for Defendants-Appellees Adam Zeldes, John Doe, Grant Ruedemann

Nathan Mark Ralls, Hoblit Darling Ralls Hernandez & Hudlow, L.L.P., San Antonio, TX, Michael David Siemer, Attorney, City Attorney’s Office for the City of San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellee City of San Antonio

Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Benedict Emesowum appeals the dismissal without an evidentiary hearing of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit arising from his arrest at a bus terminal and claiming that the defendants violated his constitutional rights in several regards. He does not challenge the district court’s several motion rulings contained in the order at issue and has, therefore, abandoned any such challenges. *See Yohey v. Collins,*985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993) (recognizing that even pro se litigants must brief arguments to preserve them); Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8).

We review the dismissal for failure to state a claim de novo, applying the standard used to review a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). *Hart v. Hairston,*343 F.3d 762, 763-64 (5th Cir. 2003). Emesowum, whose brief consists of conclusory assertions and is entirely devoid of record citations, fails to show that the district court erred. *See id.*

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
[EXHIBIT 31.1]

                            Certifications


I, Bradley Wilson, certify that:

1.   I  have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of North American
Liability Group, Inc,

1.   Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any
     untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
     necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
     under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
     to the period covered by this annual report.

2.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this annual report, fairly present in all
     material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
     cash flows of North American Liability Group, Inc. as of, and for,
     the periods presented  in this annual report.

3.   During the relative period, I was responsible for establishing and
     maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
     Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

     a.   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
          that material information relating to the registrant,
          including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
          by others within those entities, particularly during the
          period in which this annual report is being prepared.

     b.   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
          controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to
          the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date");
          and

     c.   Presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based
          on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

4.   I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
     registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board
     of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a.   All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
          internal controls which could adversely affect the
          registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report
          financial data and have identified for the registrant's
          auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and


<PAGE>


     b.   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
          or other employees who have a significant role in the
          registrant's internal controls;

5.   I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were
     significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that
     could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
     of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
     regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: April 14, 2004



/s/Bradley Wilson
-----------------------------
Chief Executive Officer,
Chief Financial Officer, and
Principal Accounting Officer
#### ARKANSAS WAREHOUSE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. SAINT-GOBAIN CERAMICS & PLASTICS, INC., Defendant-Appellee

No. 16-4218

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: June 12, 2017

Filed: June 15, 2017

Joseph F. Gilker, Gilker *&*Jones, Moun-tainburg, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Stephen Neal Joiner, Byron Jansen Walker, Rose Law Firm, Little Rock, AR, for Defendant-Appellee

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In this diversity action for unjust enrichment, Arkansas Warehouse, Inc. appeals the district court’s1 grant of for summary judgment to defendant-appellee Saint-Go-bain Ceramics & Plastics, Inc.

After careful *de novo*review, *see Johnson v. Blaukat,*453 F.3d 1108, 1112 (8th *281Cir. 2006), we conclude that the district court’s disposition of the cross-motions for summary judgment was appropriate for the reasons stated its opinion and order. Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable P.K. Holmes, III, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.
`EXHIBIT 32.2

                           NATIONAL AUTO CREDIT, INC.
                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

I, Robert V. Cuddihy, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of National Auto Credit,
Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Registrant"), in connection with the
Registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), do hereby represent, warrant and certify pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

        (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

        (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.


/s/ Robert V. Cuddihy, Jr.
--------------------------------------------
Name: Robert V. Cuddihy, Jr.
Title: Chief Financial Officer
(principal accounting and financial officer)

Date:  December 10, 2004


















A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to National Auto Credit, Inc. and
will be retained by National Auto Credit, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




                                       40`
No.14-13-00512-CR

________________________________________________________________________ IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTEENTH SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT

AT HOUSTON

________________________________________________________________________ RONALD CROW § APPELLANT V. § STATE OF TEXAS § APPELLEE

______________________________________________________________________ MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR FILING APPELLATE BRIEF COMES NOW RONALD CROW, Appellant in the above entitled and numbered cause and moves the court to extend the time for filing his appellate brief and in support thereof would show the court as follows: Appellant was convicted of the felony of injury to a child in cause number 16373 in the 21st District Court of Washington County and assessed a punishment of imprisonment for two years in the Correctional Division, on April 26, 2013. Appeal was perfected on June 7, 2013. Appellant’s brief was due on September 16, 2015. The Court reporter’s record was filed on August 19, 2015. Counsel has not had sufficient time to read the record and write the brief. Appellant is requesting an extension of 30 days, until October 24, 2015. Five prior extensions have been granted. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant prays that the foregoing motion be granted. ACCEPTED 14-13-00512-CR FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS 9/24/2015 7:06:09 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERKRespectf ully subm itted,

/s/ J. Sidney

Crowley J. Sidney

Crowley 214 Morton St. Richm ond, Texas 77469 281-232-8332 jcrowl@ windstream .net TBC No. 05170200 ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certif y that a true and correct copy of the f oregoing instrum e nt was served on the
W a shington County District Attorney ’s Of f ice, t his the 24 t

h day of S eptem

ber, 2015. /s/ J. Sidney

Crowley

2
#### Prudence Realization Corporation, Appellant, *v.*George J. Atwell, et al., Respondents.

Argued December 10, 1942;

decided March 4, 1943.

*600
      *Irving L. Schanzer*and *Albert J. Baruth*for appellant.

*Harold H. Corbin, Mark F. Hughes*and *Alfred J. Callahan*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, without costs; no opinion.

Concur: Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ. Taking no part: Lehman, Ch. J.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jorge Luis GARZA, also known as Guillermo Huerta-Sanchez, also known as Mono Renzo, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-20576 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed September 21, 2017

John Richard Berry, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S, Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jorge Luis Garza, Pro Se

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Defendant-Appellant Jorge Luis Garza appeals the denial of his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Because of the large quantity of drugs attributable to Garza for sentencing, the reduction in base offense levels provided by Amendment 782 did not lower his base offense level or his sentencing range. The judgment is therefore AFFIRMED.1

*

 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.

1

. *See United States v. Hernandez,*645 F.3d 709, 712-13 (5th Cir. 2011).
#### In the Matter of Herman L. Kasha, Appellant, against The Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York, Respondents.

Argued January 18, 1943;

decided March 4, 1943.

*631
      *Terence J. McManus, Herman L. Weisman*and *Wolfe R. Charney*for appellant.

*Nathaniel L Goldstein, Attorney-General (Bernard Bienstock*of counsel), for respondents.

Order of the Appellate Division in so far as it affirms the determination of the Board of Regents sustaining that portion of the charges designated as *“*Fifth (b) *”*as amended on the hearing, reversed on the ground that the evidence is insufficient in law to sustain that charge. The order in so far as it affirms other findings of fact of the Board of Regents affirmed, but since it does not conclusively appear that the Board of Regents would deem that the same disciplinary action is appropriate upon those findings of fact, which we affirm, the proceeding is remitted to the Board of Regents for action under paragraph (e) of subdivision 2 of section 1264 of the Education Law.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ. .
#### Allah BURMAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden R. A. PERDUE; M. Smith, Lt.; T. Vanernick, Lt., Respondents-Appellees.

No. 15-6594

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 9, 2017

Decided: May 22, 2017

Allah Burman, Appellant Pro Se.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Allah Burman, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition with prejudice. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court’s conclusion that Burman failed to show that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) was inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention. However, because the district court lacked jurisdiction, the dismissal should be without prejudice. *See*Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); *Rice v. Rivera,*617 F.3d 802, 807-08 (4th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal *222for the reasons stated by the district court, *see Burman v. Perdue,*No. 5:14-cv-00153-FPS-RWT, 2015 WL 1588069 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 9, 2015), but we modify the dismissal to be without prejudice, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2012). We grant Burman leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal but deny his other pending motions. 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 AS MODIFIED*
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Devenchi Mortez BULLARD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 14-1401, 14-14128 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(March 10, 2017)

*991Adam W. Overstreet, Christopher B. Brinson, Kenyen Ray Brown, George F. May, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Mobile, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Peter Madden, Kristen Gartman Rogers, Carlos Alfredo Williams, Federal Defender’s Office, Mobile, AL, Devenchi Mortez Bullard, Yazoo City, MS, for Defendant-Appellant

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Devenchi Mortez Bullard appeals his sentence of 57 months of imprisonment for possessing a firearm as a convicted felon and for violating the terms of his supervised release. Bullard argues that the district court erroneously relied on hearsay evidence that Bullard possessed drugs in determining his sentence. Because the district court based its sentence on reliable evidence, we affirm.

Officer Jamal Pettway testified that, while he and other officers were waiting to execute a search warrant on a residence in Mobile, a confidential informant reported that Bullard was inside the residence with three “cookies” of cocaine base. The officers entered the residence and saw Bul-lard playing a video game in close proximity to a kitchen table on which was lying what appeared to be crack cocaine and to shelves that contained at least three and one half “cookies” of cocaine base, Xanax pills, and synthetic marijuana. The officers seized from Bullard a firearm and $2,000 in cash, and they discovered inside a bedroom closet a bag marked with Bullard’s name that contained several measuring cups with a white powder residue, whisking equipment, and masks commonly used to process cocaine base. Later, Pettway interviewed Sherry Marston, who said that she believed Bullard was the ring leader in selling drugs from the residence.

We reject Bullard’s argument that the district court relied on hearsay evidence in determining his sentence. *See United States v. Ghertler,*605 F.3d 1256, 1269 (11th Cir. 2010) (“To prevail on a challenge to a sentence based on the consideration of [unreliable] information, a defendant must show ... that the challenged evidence ... actually served as the basis for the sentence.”). The record establishes that the district court did not base its decision on the statements that the informant and Marston made to Pettway. The district court stated that it was holding Bullard responsible for the drugs in the residence based on “the circumstances” that he was in a residence “with crack cocaine and other drugs all around” and. he was in possession of drug paraphernalia, a large quantity of cash, and a. firearm. Pettway provided firsthand information on which the district court based its finding that Bullard possessed drugs in connection with his firearm offense and with his violation of his supervised release.

We AFFIRM Bullard’s sentence.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Gordon Cooke and Winston A. Sealy, Appellants.

Submitted May 17, 1943;

decided May 27, 1943.

*Oliver D. Williams, Philip J. Jones*and *Ben Shorr*for motion.

*Walter R. Hart*opposed.

*Per Curiam.*

The trial court had power to make a new assignment of counsel after sentence, but before notice of appeal was filed. *(People*v. *Price,*262 N. Y. 410.) The motion made by the original counsel to be assigned by this court to prosecute the appeal is denied, but without prejudice to a motion by the defendant for good cause for a change of assigned counsel.

Motion denied, etc.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Justin HOLIFIELD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-16375 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(March 30, 2017)

Yvette Rhodes, Arthur Lee Bentley, III, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, Michael C. Bagge-Hernandez, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Fort Myers, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Martin DerOvanesian, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fort Myers, FL, Rosemary Cakmis, Donna Lee Elm, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Orlando, FL, for Defendant-Appellant

Before TJOFLAT, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Meghan Ann Collins, appointed counsel for Justin Holifield in this direct criminal appeal from the revocation of his supervised release, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. Califor*
      *850
      *nia,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Holifield’s revocation and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 10.11





 Exhibit 10.11 

WHEREAS, in compliance with the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, each of the 401(k) Plans has been amended, or is in the process of being
amended, to eliminate the 6-Month Suspension Requirement, effective January 1, 2019; and 

AMENDMENT TO THE 
 NEWELL
BRANDS SUPPLEMENTAL 
 EMPLOYEE SAVINGS PLAN 

WHEREAS, NOC sponsors and maintains the Newell Brands Supplemental Employee Savings Plan (the “SESP”), which, in part,
allows eligible employees of NOC and certain of its affiliates to defer portions of their base salary, commissions and incentive compensation; and 

WHEREAS, under Section 8.1 of the SESP, the BAC may amend the SESP at any time to ensure that the SESP complies with the
requirements of Section 409A of the Code, provided that such amendment does not materially increase the benefit costs of the SESP to NOC; and 

WHEREAS, under Section 3.5(b) of the SESP, a participant’s deferral election under the SESP shall be cancelled on account of
a hardship distribution from a 401(k) Plan to the extent necessary to comply with the 6-Month Suspension Requirement; and 

WHEREAS, to ensure that the SESP complies with Section 409A of the Code, in connection with the elimination of the 6-Month Suspension Requirement from the 401(k) Plans, the BAC now desires to amend the SESP to remove the requirement that a participant’s deferral election under the SESP be cancelled for any period on or
after January 1, 2019, on account of a hardship distribution. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the BAC hereby amends the
SESP as set forth herein, effective January 1, 2019: 
 1. Section 3.5(a) of the SESP is amended to read, in its entirety, as follows:

 (a) Duration. A Deferral Election shall only be effective for the Plan Year with respect to which such Deferral
Election applies. Except as provided in Section 3.5(b), a Deferral Election, once irrevocable, cannot be cancelled during the Plan Year. A Participant must make a new Deferral Election for each Plan Year for which the Participant elects to
defer Compensation. 
 2. Section 3.5(b)(ii) of the SESP is amended to read, in its entirety, as follows: 

(ii) Unforeseeable Emergency. The BAC shall cancel a Participant’s Deferral Election due to an Unforeseeable
Emergency from the Plan to the extent necessary to comply with the requirements of Code Section 409A, with respect to the Unforeseeable Emergency. 

[Signature lines follow on the next page] 












 This document may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original, and all such counterparts together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. 
 Dated this
19th day of December, 2018 
  

					
	/s/ Michael Rickheim	 		 	/s/ Elizabeth Moore
	Michael Rickheim	 		 	Elizabeth Moore

  

					
	/s/ Randy Michel	 		 	  

	Randy Michel
EXHIBIT
32.1





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 Zealous Trading Group, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ending February 29, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Milton
C. Ault, III, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to
my knowledge 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.





/s/ MILTON C. AULT,
III


Milton C.
Ault, III


Chief
Executive Officer


Date:
June 11, 2008





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Zealous Trading Group, Inc. and will be retained by Zealous Trading Group, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.