alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

           Written Statement of President and Chief Executive Officer
                         Pursuant to Section 906 of the
               Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

       The undersigned, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Mohegan
Tribal Gaming Authority (the "Authority"), hereby certifies that, to his
knowledge, on the date hereof:

       (a)    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of the Authority for the
              Quarter Ended December 31, 2001 filed on the date hereof with the
              Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies
              with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
              Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                                              /s/ William J. Velardo
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              William J. Velardo
                                              President and Chief Executive
                                              Officer
                                              November 12, 2002

                                       41
#### Kenisha S. BOYD, Plaintiff-Appellant v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, Defendant-Appellee

No. 17-40318 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed September 18, 2017

Timberly Jamal Davis, Timberly J. Davis Law Firm, P.L.L.C., Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Allan Kennedy Cook, Office of the Attorney General, Law Enforcement Defense Division, Austin, TX, for Defendant-Appel-lee

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Kenisha S. Boyd brought suit against her former employer, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (“TDCJ”), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The magistrate judge held a mediation conference and reported to the district court that “the conference resulted in a settlement.” The district court twice granted the parties’ joint motion to stay the proceedings to allow the parties to finalize the settlement agreement. In their second motion to stay, the parties asserted that they were “waiting on the finalization of the State of Texas settlement process before the release can be signed and a stipulation of dismissal can be filed with the Court.” Boyd then moved the district court “to determine that no settlement agreement yet exists in this case, and that the purported settlement agreement ... is not a valid and enforceable agreement.” The district court denied her motion.

Boyd appeals the district court’s denial of her motion. She asserts that this court has appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which provides that “[t]he courts of appeals ... shall have jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions of the district courts.” But the parties never *398filed a stipulation of dismissal with the district court, and the district court did not otherwise enter a final judgment resolving the dispute between the parties. Boyd does not invoke the collateral order doctrine, and in any case the validity of the settlement agreement is not “effectively unre-viewable on appeal from a final judgment.” *See In re Deepwater Horizon,*793 F.3d 479, 484 (5th Cir. 2015) (setting forth the three-pronged test to apply the collateral order doctrine).

Because Boyd does not appeal a final decision of the district court, we DISMISS her appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

*

 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.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 44 (Monday, March 7, 2022)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 12557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04908]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2022 / 
Presidential Documents

[[Page 12557]]


                Notice of March 3, 2022

                
Continuation of the National Emergency With 
                Respect to Venezuela

                On March 8, 2015, the President issued Executive Order 
                13692, declaring a national emergency with respect to 
                the situation in Venezuela, including the Government of 
                Venezuela's erosion of human rights guarantees, 
                persecution of political opponents, curtailment of 
                press freedoms, use of violence and human rights 
                violations and abuses in response to antigovernment 
                protests, and arbitrary arrest and detention of 
                antigovernment protesters, as well as the exacerbating 
                presence of significant government corruption.

                The President took additional steps pursuant to this 
                national emergency in Executive Order 13808 of August 
                24, 2017; Executive Order 13827 of March 19, 2018; 
                Executive Order 13835 of May 21, 2018; Executive Order 
                13850 of November 1, 2018; Executive Order 13857 of 
                January 25, 2019; and Executive Order 13884 of August 
                5, 2019.

                The circumstances, as described in Executive Order 
                13692 and in subsequent Executive Orders issued with 
                respect to Venezuela, have not improved, and they 
                continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to 
                the national security and foreign policy of the United 
                States. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of 
                the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am 
                continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared 
                in Executive Order 13692.

                This notice shall be published in the Federal Register 
                and transmitted to the Congress.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    March 3, 2022.

[FR Doc. 2022-04908
Filed 3-4-22; 8:45 am]
Billing code 3395-F2-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information   extracted  from  the
consolidated  balance  sheets  and  consolidated  statements  of  income  and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>


<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,171,017
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      449,313
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        397,257
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                          48,976,386
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,993,973
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,397,168
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,993,973
<SALES>                                             51,580
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,617,884
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,452,324
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   310,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   100,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 497,339
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,165,560
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,165,560
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,165,560
<EPS-BASIC>                                         2.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         2.27



</TABLE>
#### Geo Edward MCCALIP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TED CONFERENCES, LLC; Sapling Foundation, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-55510

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 8, 2017 *

Filed May 10, 2017

Geo Edward McCalip, Pro Se

Peter M. Shimamoto, Esquire, Attorney, Afield Grivakes Zucker LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Guy R. Cohen, Davis & Gilbert LLP, New York, NY, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

*945MEMORANDUM **

Geo Edward McCalip appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). *Hebbe v. Pliler,*627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed McCalip’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1 claims because McCalip failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants acted under the color of state law. *See Chudacoff v. Univ. Med. Ctr. of S. Nev.,*649 F.3d 1143, 1149 (9th Cir. 2011) (elements of § 1983 action); *Dietrich v. John Ascuaga’s Nugget,*548 F.3d 892, 900 (9th Cir. 2008) (“Merely complaining to the police does not convert a private party into a state actor.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); *Jones v. Kmart Corp.,*17 Cal.4th 329, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 844, 949 P.2d 941, 943-44 (1998) (private individual cannot be liable under § 52.1 for alleged direct violation of federal constitutional right).

The district court properly dismissed McCalip’s Cal. Civ. Code § 3294 claim because McCalip did not allege facts demonstrating malice, oppression, or fraud. *See*Cal. Civ. Code § 3294 (requirements for punitive damages under California law).

We reject as unsupported by the record McCalip’s contentions regarding defendants misleading the district court.

We do not consider evidence, allegations, or arguments raised for the first time on appeal. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009); *Lowry v. Barnhart,*329 F.3d 1019, 1025 (9th Cir. 2003) (“The appellate process is for addressing the legal issues a case presents, not for generating new evidence to parry an opponent’s arguments.”); *United States v. Elias,*921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”). To the extent McCalip requests in his opening brief that we vacate and remand so that he may introduce allegations and evidence related to contracts between defendants and the City of Long Beach that were in McCalip’s possession, but not introduced, during the underlying proceedings, we deny the request.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Maurice Antwaun MCKNIGHT, a/k/a Weezie, a/k/a Wee, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-6899

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: September 26, 2017

Decided: September 28, 2017

Maurice Antwaun Mcknight, FCI Edge-field, Edgefield, SC, pro se

Arthur Bradley Parham, Esq., Office of the United States Attorney, Florence, SC, Stanley D. Ragsdale, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, SC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Maurice Antwaun McKnight seeks to appeal the district court’s order disposing of the Government’s post-judgment motion. We lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s order and, thus, dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are *787adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
Page 1 of 1INSTRUCTIONS: Please type or print in ink. Please read carefully the attached instructions and supply the information requested on this form.Use additional sheet(s) if necessary.1. Company Name and Address4. EPA ProductRegistrationOMB Approval 2070-0107OMB Approval 2070-0057United States Environmental ProtectionAgency Washington, D.C. 20460DATA CALL-IN RESPONSE3. Date and Type of DCI and NumberGENERIC07-Apr-2010ID # GDCI-100801-296702. Case # and Name3028 Bioban P-1487 (*)Chemical # and Name1008014-(2-Nitrobutyl)morpholine5. I wish tocancel thisproduct registration voluntarily6. Generic Data7. Product Specific Data7a. My product is an MUP andI agree to satisfy the MUPrequirements on the attachedform entitled "RequirementsStatus and Registrant'sResponse."7b. My product is an EUP andI agree to satisfy the EUPrequirements on the attachedform entitled "RequirementsStatus and Registrant'sResponse."6a. I am claiming a GenericData Exemption because Iobtain the active ingredientfrom the source EPA registration number listed below.6b. I agree to satisfy GenericData requirements as indicatedon the attached form entitled"Requirements Status andRegistrant's Response."N.A.N.A.10. Name of Company11. Phone Number9. Date8. Certification I certify that the statements made on this form and all attachments are true, accurate, and complete. I acknowledge that anyknowingly false or misleading statement may be punishable by fine, imprisonment or both under applicable law.Signature and Title of Company's Authorized Representative__________________________________4-(2-Nitrobutyl)morpholineINSTRUCTIONS: Please type or print in ink. Please read carefully the attached instructions and supply the information requested on this form.Use additional sheet(s) if necessary.4. GuidelineRequirementNumber5. Study Title1. Company Name and AddressPage 1 of 1OMB Approval 2070-0107OMB Approval 2070-0057United States Environmental ProtectionAgency Washington, D.C. 20460REQUIREMENTS STATUS AND REGISTRANT'S RESPONSE3. Date and Type of DCI and NumberID #GENERIC07-Apr-2010GDCI-100801-296702. Case # and Name3028 Bioban P-1487 (*)100801Chemical # and Name8. TimeFrame(Months)9. RegistrantResponse7. TestSubstance6. UsePatternPROTOCOLProgressReports321870.430024X, ZCombined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity12. Name of Company13. Phone NumberSignature and Title of Company's Authorized Representative__________________________________10. Certification I certify that the statements made on this form and all attachments are true, accurate, and complete. Iacknowledge that anyknowingly false or misleading statement may be punishable by fine, imprisonment or both under applicable law11. DateUnited States Environmental ProtectionAgency Washington, D.C. 20460LIST OF ALL REGISTRANTS SENT THIS DATA CALL-IN NOTICECo. Nr.Company NameAgent ForAddressCity & StateZipCase # and Name:3028,Bioban P-1487 (*)DOW CHEMICAL CO., THETHE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY1500 EAST LAKE COOK ROADBUFFALO GROVEIL60089464
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Exhibit 27

                      Financial Data Schedule
 "This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from March 31, 1999 10QSB and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements."
</LEGEND>

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                  MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                        24,266
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 206,752
<ALLOWANCES>                  0
<INVENTORY>                   10,796,804
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              0
<PP&E>                        49,937
<DEPRECIATION>                (58,001)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                9,771,094
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         0
<BONDS>                       16,300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   1,212
<COMMON>                      47,883
<OTHER-SE>                    9,537,312
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  9,771,094
<SALES>                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              28,370
<CGS>                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 46,200
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (75,831)
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (75,831)
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  (75,831)
<EPS-BASIC>                 .000
<EPS-DILUTED>                 .000


</TABLE>
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5781 

To complement the Utah Public Lands Initiative by ensuring land use 

certainty in seven counties in Utah. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2016 

Mr. BISHOP of Utah (for himself and Mr. CHAFFETZ) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To complement the Utah Public Lands Initiative by ensuring 

land use certainty in seven counties in Utah. 

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 ‘‘Utah Public Lands 

5 Initiative Partner Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) The Utah Congressional delegation is ad9 vancing the Utah Public Lands Initiative (PLI), a 

10 seven county comprehensive land planning bill. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5781 IH

1 (2) PLI would designate more than 4,500,000 

2 acres of Federal land for conservation purposes 

3 while making more than 1,000,000 acres of Federal 

4 land available for multiple use and sustained yield. 

5 (3) Land use certainty and finality are funda6 mental principles of PLI. 

7 (4) Section 320301 of title 54, United States 

8 Code (commonly known as the ‘‘Antiquities Act of 

9 1906’’) empowers the President of the United States 

10 with unilateral authority to designate Federal lands 

11 as national monuments. 

12 (5) Enactment of PLI would preclude the need 

13 for future Presidents to use section 320301 of title 

14 54, United States Code, in counties that participate 

15 in PLI. 

16 (6) Local community support for PLI would di17 minish if permanent land use certainty is not 

18 achieved through the PLI and this Act. 

19 SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN LANDS 

20 IN UTAH. 

21 A national monument designation, or a boundary ad22 justment that increases the size of an existing national 

23 monument, under section 320301 of title 54, United 

24 States Code, within or on any portion of Federal land in 

25 the counties of Summit, Uintah, Duchesne, Carbon, 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5781 IH

1 Grand, Emery, and San Juan, in the State of Utah, shall 

2 be made only pursuant to an Act of Congress. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 21.1**

** **

**Subsidiariesof Rafaella Apparel Group, Inc.**

 
| **Name of Subsidiary**   | ** ** | **State or Other Jurisdiction of********Incorporation or Organization** | ** ** | **Names Under Which  Business is Done** |
|------------------------------------|------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|
| ** **                         | ** ** | ** **                                                                                            | ** ** | ** **                                                  |
| Verrazano, Inc.               |       | New York                                                                                              | ** ** | **—**                                                  |
| ** **                         | ** ** | ** **                                                                                            | ** ** | ** **                                                  |
| Rafaella  Apparel Far East Limited |       | Hong Kong                                                                                             | ** ** | **—**                                                  |

 

----
# EUR-Lex - 32001R1144 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32001R1144

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 1144/2001 of 11 June 2001 fixing, for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No 411/97, the ceiling for Community financial assistance granted to producer organisations setting up operational funds for 2000 **

*
Official Journal L 155 , 12/06/2001 P. 0006 - 0006 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1144/2001

of 11 June 2001

fixing, for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No 411/97, the ceiling for Community financial assistance granted to producer organisations setting up operational funds for 2000

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 411/97 of 3 March 1997 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 as regards operational programmes, operational funds and Community financial assistance(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1923/1999(2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Article 15(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96(3), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 911/2001(4), provides for the granting of Community financial assistance to producer organisations setting up operational funds. Paragraph 5 of that Article provides that from 1999, financial assistance is to be capped at 4,5 % of the value of the marketed production of each producer organisation, provided that the total financial assistance represents less than 2,5 % of the total turnover of all producer organisations.

(2) According to information forwarded to the Commission by the Member States pursuant to Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 411/97, the financial assistance applied for in respect of 2000 by producer organisations amounts to EUR 342,46 million against a total turnover of all producer organisations of EUR 12753,69 million. The ceiling for the abovementioned Community financial assistance should therefore be set at 3,4780 % of the value of marketed production of each producer organisation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The Community financial assistance provided for in Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 shall be capped at 3,4780 % of the value of marketed production of each producer organisation for aid applications in respect of 2000.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 11 June 2001.

For the Commission

Franz Fischler

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 62, 4.3.1997, p. 9.

(2) OJ L 238, 9.9.1999, p. 11.

(3) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 1.

(4) OJ L 129, 11.5.2001, p. 3.