alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Joseph GAITO, Appellant, v. Samuel STRAUSS, Edward E. Fagan, Ralph B. Miller, Gregory Scorzafave, Jr., Edward C. Boyle, William Clany Smith, Dennis Timpona, Mike Levine, Robert W. Duggan, Edwin J. Martin et al.

No. 15842.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 4, 1966.

Decided Nov. 8, 1966.

Joseph Gaito, pro se.

Maurice Louik, and Francis A. Barry, Pittsburgh, Pa. (Barry E. Wood, Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for appellees Fagan and others.

Thomas J. Reinstadtler, Jr., Egler, Mc-Gregor & Reinstadtler, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellee Mike Levine.

Before FORMAN, FREEDMAN and SEITZ, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the order of the United States District Court for the *788Western District of Pennsylvania dismissing an action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 for alleged deprivation of the constitutional rights of appellant, Joseph Gaito, in that the appellees conspired to convict the appellant of certain crimes in the courts of Pennsylvania through the use of illegally obtained evidence, perjured testimony, and other violations of appellant’s constitutional rights. The appellant was in fact convicted of these crimes in November 1959. The details of the allegations and the factual background of the case are presented at length in the comprehensive opinion of the District Court reported at 249 F.Supp. 923 (1966). The complaint requested both damages and equitable “relief from the illegally contrived judgment.”

To the extent that the complaint sought damages, we affirm on the basis of the District Court’s conclusion that the action was barred by applicable statutes of limitations. 249 F.Supp. at 931-933. This disposition makes unnecessary any discussion of the other grounds argued by appellant against the judgment of the District Court on the damage phase.

Appellant’s claim for equitable relief would not, however, be barred by these limitations. See 2 Moore, Federal Practice, § 307[3] (1965). But the District Court could not treat his civil rights complaint as a petition for habeas corpus since the warden of the state prison in which the appellant was incarcerated was not a party, nor does it appear that the complaint alleged other prerequisites for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Moreover, as the District Court observed, no other form of equitable relief was applicable. 249 F.Supp. at 930.

Finally, the appellant notes specially in his reply brief that in the interim between the decision of the District Court and this appeal, the conviction of his co-defendant and brother, Frank Gaito, was vacated by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court because of the admission of an illegally obtained confession. Commonwealth ex rel. Gaito v. Maroney, 422 Pa. 171, 220 A.2d 628 (1966). This circumstance can have no bearing on the grounds for affirmance here.

Thus the order of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania of February 3, 1966 granting the motions to dismiss the complaint will be affirmed.
**Exhibit
      32.1**














**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE**


**OFFICER
      REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING**


**FINANCIAL
      STATEMENTS**









I,
      Neil
      Smit, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Charter Communications
      Holdings, LLC and Charter Communications Holdings Capital Corporation (the
      "Company") in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the
      Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the
      "Report") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission:




·
            fully
                complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
                Exchange
                Act of 1934; and




·
            the
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.









/s/
      Neil Smit


Neil
      Smit


President
      and Chief Executive Officer


March  29,
      2006
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2006 of Resources Connection, Inc. (the Form 10-K), I, Stephen J. Giusto, Chief Financial Officer of Resources
Connection, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1. The Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2. The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Resources Connection, Inc.



August 8, 2006



/S/    STEPHEN J.
GIUSTOStephen J. GiustoChief Financial Officer andExecutive Vice President of Corporate Development




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 Resources Connection, Inc. and will be retained by Resources Connection, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not
being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6364 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to maintain certain telehealth 

flexibilities relating to provider privacy under the Medicare program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 13, 2023 

Mr. BALDERSON (for himself, Mr. DUNN of Florida, Mr. SCHWEIKERT, Mr. 

JOHNSON of Ohio, and Mr. CAREY) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition 

to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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 amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to maintain 

certain telehealth flexibilities relating to provider privacy 

under the Medicare program. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medicare Telehealth 

5 Privacy Act of 2023’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6364 IH

1 SEC. 2. MAINTAINING CERTAIN TELEHEALTH FLEXIBILI2 TIES RELATING TO PROVIDER PRIVACY 

3 UNDER THE MEDICARE PROGRAM. 

4 Section 1834(m) of the Social Security Act (42 

5 U.S.C. 1395m(m)) is amended by adding at the end the 

6 following new paragraph: 

7 ‘‘(10) ENSURING PHYSICIAN AND PRACTI8 TIONER PRIVACY.—In the case of a physician or 

9 practitioner who elects to furnish telehealth services 

10 at a distant site that is the home of such physician 

11 or practitioner, if the Secretary requires such physi12 cian or practitioner to include the address of such 

13 home on any enrollment form of such physician or 

14 practitioner under this title (or requires such physi15 cian or practitioner to bill for such services using 

16 such address), the Secretary may not make such ad17 dress available to the public in any manner.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6792

ANTONIO COX,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

W. F. AMONETTE; DAVID SMITH, Warden Camp #1;

M. AMONETTE, Doctor, Powhatan Correctional

Center,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, District Judge.

(CA-00-181-7)

Submitted: August 29, 2000 Decided: September 14, 2000

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Antonio Cox, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is before us on Appellant Antonio Cox’s petition

for rehearing. We dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction,

based on the timing of Cox’s filing of his notice of appeal.

However, in light of evidence that the district court had granted

Cox an extension of time to file his notice of appeal out of time,

we grant rehearing and affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. See Cox v. Amonette, No. CA-00-181-7 (W.D. Va. Apr. 21,

2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Unassociated Document


 



AMENDMENT NO. 1 OPTION AGREEMENT







This Amendment No. 1 to the Option Agreement (the “Original Agreement”) dated as of January 26, 2012, is entered into to be effective as of the 24th day of April 2012, by and among Pershing Gold Corporation f/k/a Sagebrush Gold Ltd., a Nevada corporation, with principal executive offices located at 1658 Cole Boulevard, Building 6, Suite 210, Lakewood CO 80401 (“Pershing”), and American Strategic Minerals Corporation, a Nevada corporation, with principal executive offices located at 31161 Highway 90, Nucla, CO 81424 ( “Amicor”).







WHEREAS, Pershing and Amicor desire to amend the Original Agreement in order to amend the definition of “Expiration Date” as set forth therein.







NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:








	
  

	
1.

	
Section 2 of the Original Agreement  shall be amended and restated as follows:












“Buyer’s Option to acquire the Properties evidenced by this Option Agreement shall expire and automatically terminate at 11:59 p.m., M.D.T. on May 15, 2012 (the “Expiration Date”) if the Option is not exercised by Buyer prior to that date.”








	
  

	
2.

	
All other terms and provisions of the Original Agreement in direct conflict with the amendments specifically set forth herein are hereby amended to conform to these amendments; and except for these amendments, all other terms and conditions of the Original Agreement shall remain unamended hereby and in full force and effect.







 



	
  

	
3.

	
This Amendment, together with the Original Agreement, embodies the entire agreement and understanding between Pershing and Amicor relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings relating to such subject matter.







 



	
  

	
4.

	
If any provision of this Amendment, or the application of such provisions to any Person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, the remainder of this Amendment, or the application of such provision to Persons or circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected thereby.







 



	
  

	
5.

	
This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, and by the different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when executed shall be deemed an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement.  A facsimile transmission of this signed Amendment shall be legal and binding on all parties hereto.







 


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 




  





  











  








 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly caused this Amendment to be executed and delivered on the date first written above.


 


 



	
PERSHING GOLD CORPORATION

	
AMERICAN STRATEGIC MINERALS CORPORATION


	 	 
	
/s/ Stephen Alfers 

	
/s/ George Glasier


	
By: Stephen Alfers 

	
By: George Glasier


	
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer 

	
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer
#### Dorman W. CHANDLER and W. Fred Dryden, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 22705.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 27, 1966.

Harold L. Murphy, Howe & Murphy, Tallapoosa, Ga., for appellants.

Allen L. Chancey, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Charles L. Goodson, U. S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for appellee.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and BROWN and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. We have carefully considered the issue raised with respect to the alleged unlawful search of a truck which was found to be carrying parts of a still. Several subsidiary questions need not be reached by us in view of our determination that, without doubt, the search as conducted by the officers was legal.

The judgment is, therefore, affirmed.
#### Thomas John HEILMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. DILLEN, Official Capacity; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-56852

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 11, 2017 *

Filed April 25, 2017

Thomas John Heilman, Pro Se

Kevin Allen Voth, Deputy Attorney General, California Department of Justice, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Thoman John Heilman, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to pay the filing fee after revoking Heilman’s in for-ma pauperis status (“IFP”) because he has three strikes under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Andrews v. King,*398 F.3d 1113, 1118 *&*n.6 (9th Cir. 2005). We vacate and remand.

*465The district court revoked Heilman’s IFP status on the basis that Heilman had filed at least three prior actions in federal court which were dismissed for being frivolous or malicious, or for failing to state a claim. However, at the time of its decision, the district court did not have the benefit of *El-Shaddai v. Zamora,*833 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2016) and *Washington v. Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department,*833 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 2016). We remand for the district court reconsider Heilman’s IFP status in light of these two intervening opinions.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT - 32.2

MOSSIMO, INC.

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 Quarterly Report of Mossimo, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mali Shrinivas, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to the best of my knowledge:

         (1)  The Report to which this certification is attached as Exhibit -
              32.2 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, results of operations,
              and cash flows of the Company.


/s/ Edwin Lewis
------------------
Edwin Lewis
Acting Chief Financial Officer
August 13, 2004
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donald Daniel ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-15030 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(March 31, 2017)

*856David Charles Waterman, Arthur Lee Bentley, III, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, Kristen A. Fiore, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Pensacola, FL, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee

Donna Lee Elm, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Orlando, FL for Defendant-Appellant

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JULIE CARNES and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Stephen J. Langs, appointed counsel for Donald Daniel Robinson in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*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 Robinson’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.1  Press Release



PRESS RELEASE
July 23, 1999

                              For further information contact:
                              David M. Bradley
                              Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
                              North Central Bancshares, Inc.
                              825 Central Avenue
                              Fort Dodge, Iowa 50501
                              515-576-7531

                    NORTH CENTRAL BANCSHARES, INC. ANNOUNCES
                            STOCK REPURCHASE PROGRAM

Fort Dodge, Iowa, July 23, 1999 - North Central Bancshares, Inc. (Nasdaq:
"FFFD") (the "Company"), the holding company for First Federal Savings Bank of
Iowa, announced that it will commence a stock repurchase program beginning on or
about July 29th, 1999.  The program authorizes the Company to repurchase up to
5.64% or 150,000 shares of its 2,657,242 outstanding shares of common stock
during the next twelve months.  The repurchases will be made from time to time,
in open market transactions, at the discretion of management.

North Central Bancshares, Inc., with over $340 million in assets, is the holding
company for First Federal Savings Bank of Iowa, a federally chartered stock
savings bank.  First Federal is a community-oriented institution serving Iowa
through 8 full service locations in Fort Dodge, Nevada, Ames, Burlington, Mt.
Pleasant, and Perry, Iowa.  First Federal's deposits are insured by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             685
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   685
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     685
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           701
<OTHER-SE>                                          16
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       685
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.1

                              CONSENT OF ACCOUNTANT



                         THOMPSON, GREENSPON & CO., P.C.
                          Certified Public Accountants
                             Management Consultants

To the Board of Directors
World Wide Video, Inc.
Culpeper, Virginia

We hereby  consent to the use of our report,  dated January 7, 2000, in the Form
10-KSB of World Wide Video,  Inc.,  as filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission.

                       /s/ Thompson, Greenspon & Co., P.C.


Fairfax, Virginia
January 28, 2000




               --------------------------------------------------
   3930 Walnut Street Fairfax, VA 22030-4790 (703) 385-8888 FAX (703) 385-3940
    E-Mail Address - tgc@tgccpa.com Home Page Address - http://www.tgccpa.com
Marhlau BELIZAIRE, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1569

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

SEPTEMBER 15, 2017

Following review of the petition for belated appeal and the State's response thereto, it is ordered that said petition is hereby denied.

LOGUE, SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ., concur.