alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
B R UC E THOM AS, an individual., Plaintiff - Appe lla nt,
v. SNAP-ON INC ORPOR

ATED, a De la w are c orporation, De fe nda

nt - Appe lle e . No. 12-56525 D.C . No. 3:11-c v-01435-JAHRB B
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Southe rn Distric t of C a lifornia J ohn A. Houston, Distric

t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 17, 2015 * * B e fore : O’ SC ANNLAIN, LEAVY, a n d FER N ANDEZ, C irc uit Judge s. B ruc e Thom a s a

ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s orde rs de ny ing his post-judgm e n t re que sts for a n e arly ne utra l e v a l uation a

nd a se ttle m e nt c onfe re nc e in his a c tion a lle ging tha

t de fe nda nt m isa ppropria te d his inte lle c tua l prope rty . W e



# FIL ED
MAR 02 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo whe t he r the distric t
c ourt ha d subje c t m atte r jurisdic tion, Sc hnabe l v . Lui , 302 F.3d 1023, 1029 (9th C ir. 2002), a

nd re v ie w for an a

buse of disc re tion thedistric t c o urt’ s c om plia nc e with its loc a l rule s c onc e rning e arly ne utra l e va luation, Bias v . Moy nihan , 508 F.3d 1212, 1223 (9th C ir. 2007). C ontra ry to Thom a s’ s c onte ntion, the distric t c ourt ha d subje c t m atte r jurisdic tion ove r his a c tion. Se e28 U.S.C
. § 1331 (fe d e ra l c ourts ha ve “ origina l jurisdic tion of a ll c i vil a c tions a rising unde r the C onstitution, la ws, or tre atie s of the U nite d State s” ); 28 U.S.C . § 1332(a )(1) (fe de ra l subje c t m atte r jurisdic t ion
e xists ove r dispute s involving c itiz e ns of diffe re nt sta te s a nd a n am ount in
c ontrove rsy

ove r $75,000.00). The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in de ny ing Thom a s’ s postjudgm e nt re que sts for a

n e arly ne utra l e va luation a

nd a se ttle m e n t c onfe re nc e be c a use Thom a s did not ha

ve a c om pla int pe nding be fore the c ourt. Se e Bias , 508 F.3d at 1223 (“ B roa d de fe re nc e is give n to a distric t c ourt’ s inte rpre t ation of its loc a l rule s.” (c ita

tions a nd inte rna l quota

t ion m arks om itte d)); se e also C i vLR 16.1(c )(1) (an e arly

ne utra l e v a luation c onfe re nc e m ust be he ld within forty -five da y s of the filing of a

n a nswe r or, if the answe r ha s not be e n file d, a s de t e rm ine d by the a ssigne d judic ia l offic e r).
2 1 2
- 5 6 5 2 5Thom a s’ s m otion to e xpe dite , file d on De c e m be r 18, 2014, is denie d a s
m oot. AFFIRM E D.

3 1 2
- 5 6 5 2 5
EXHIBIT 18


Certified Public Accountants
Suite 2801
One Independent Drive
Jacksonville, Florida 32202-5034                        Deloitte
                                                        & Touche
Tel:   (904) 665 1400
Fax:  (904) 355 9104
www.us.deloitte.com












December 14, 2001

Trailer Bridge, Inc.
10405 New Berlin Road East
Jacksonville, Florida

Dear Sirs:

We have audited the financial statements of Trailer Bridge, Inc. as of December
31, 2000 and 1999, and for each of the three years in the period ended December
31, 2000, included in your Annual Report on Form 10-KA to the Securities and
Exchange Commission and have issued our report thereon dated March 30, 2001,
which expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph
concerning a change in the method of accounting for periodic vessel dry-docking.
Note 1 to such financial statements contains a description of your adoption
during the year ended December 31, 2000 of expensing periodic vessel dry-docking
costs as incurred. In our judgment, such change is to an alternative accounting
principle that is preferable under the circumstances.

Yours truly,

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP










___________
Deloitte
Touche
Tohmatsu
___________
Alvin D. CLAYTON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0208

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 09, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 13 (Wednesday, January 22, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7696-7697]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01484]

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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as 
other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for 
immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and 
at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be 
obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the 
appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of 
Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards 
enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
    Comments received are subject to public disclosure. In general, 
comments

[[Page 7697]]

received will be made available without change and will not be modified 
to remove personal or business information including confidential, 
contact, or other identifying information. Comments should not include 
any information such as confidential information that would not be 
appropriate for public disclosure.
    Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at 
the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, 
Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than February 21, 2025.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (Brent B. Hassell, Assistant 
Vice President) P.O. Box 27622, Richmond, Virginia 23261. Comments can 
also be sent electronically to [email protected]:
    1. United Community Banks, Inc., Greenville, South Carolina; to 
acquire ANB Holdings, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire American 
National Bank, both of Oakland Park, Florida.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2025-01484 Filed 1-21-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

IDERIA WAYNE SMITH, 00607161, )

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) No. 3:06-CV-0288-H

) ECF

NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, Director, )

Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, Correctional ) 

Institutions Division, )

Respondent. )

RECOMMENDATION REGARDING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

A Notice of Appeal has been filed in the above captioned action in which: 

(X) the District Court has entered a final order in a habeas corpus proceeding brought pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. 

( ) the District Court has entered a final order in a proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), the undersigned

Magistrate Judge recommends as follows:

IFP STATUS:

( ) the party appealing has paid the appellate filing fee.

(X) the party appealing should be GRANTED leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

( ) the party appealing is proceeding in forma pauperis.

( ) the party appealing should be DENIED leave to proceed in forma pauperis

for the following reason(s):

( ) the Court recommends that the District Court certify, pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)

and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that the appeal is not taken in good faith;

( ) the person appealing is not a pauper;

( ) the person appealing has not complied with the requirements of Rule 24 of the Federal

Rules of Appellate Procedure and/or 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) as ordered by the Court.

(See Notice of Deficiency and Order entered on ).

COA:

( ) a Certificate of Appealability should be GRANTED. (See issues set forth below).

(X) a Certificate of Appealability should be DENIED. (See reasons stated below).

REASONS FOR DENIAL: For the reasons stated in the Findings and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge, filed on February 2, 2007, which were adopted by the District Court on February 14, 2007, the

Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing that reasonable jurists could conclude that the claims related

to his trial and conviction are not barred by the statute of limitations. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d); Slack v. McDaniel,

529 U.S. 473, 120 S. Ct. 1595, 1602, 146 L. Ed .2d 542 (2000). 

SIGNED this 11th day of June, 2007.

_____________________________________

PAUL D. STICKNEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

 Case 3:06-cv-00288-H Document 21 Filed 06/11/07 Page 1 of 1 PageID 73
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 847 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 847

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to eliminate origination fees 
                        on Federal Direct loans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 18, 2021

Mr. Braun (for himself, Ms. Sinema, Mr. Coons, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Warnock, 
and Ms. Warren) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
  referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to eliminate origination fees 
                        on Federal Direct loans.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Student Loan Tax Elimination Act''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF ORIGINATION FEES ON FEDERAL DIRECT LOANS.

    (a) Repeal of Origination Fees.--Subsection (c) of section 455 of 
the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(c)) is repealed.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to loans made under part D of title IV of the Higher 
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087a et seq.) for which the first 
disbursement of principal is made, or, in the case of a Federal Direct 
Consolidation Loan, the application is received, on or after March 27, 
2020.
                                 <all>
```
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 30, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on January 23, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 603 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-XXXX, K2025-XXXX.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-01919 Filed 1-29-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 15 (Friday, January 24, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8115-8116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01690]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-122-857]

Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No 
Shipments; 2021; Correction

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) published notice in 
the Federal Register on August 1, 2023 in which Commerce announced

[[Page 8116]]

the final results of the 2021 administrative review of the antidumping 
duty (AD) order on softwood lumber from Canada. That notice incorrectly 
stated the all-others rate established in the less than fair value 
investigation to be 6.58 percent. The correct all-others rate 
established in the less than fair value investigation is 6.04 percent.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Pedersen, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2769.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 1, 2023, Commerce published in the Federal Register the 
final results of the 2021 administrative review of the AD order on 
softwood lumber from Canada.\1\ Commerce incorrectly stated the all-
others rate established in the less than fair value investigation to be 
6.58 percent. The correct all-others rate established in the less than 
fair value investigation is 6.04 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final 
Determination of No Shipments; 2021, 88 FR 50107 (August 1, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 1, 2023, in FR Doc 2023-16298, on 
page 50108, in the second column, replace the all-others rate of 
``6.58'' percent with ``6.04'' percent.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 
CFR 351.213.

    Dated: January 17, 2025.
Abdelali Elouaradia,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2025-01690 Filed 1-23-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```
J.P.M. v. In the matter of A.M.M.

2170522

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

March 7, 2018

Transferred to Randolph Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala.R.Juv.P.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-1309

LEBON BRUCE WALKER, a/k/a Larry Gene Platt;

PATRICIA ANNETTE LEE-WALKER, a/k/a Angie

Platt,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY, TOYOTA MOTOR

CREDIT CORPORATION, AND/OR ENTITY, et al.;

DENNIS COX, Individually and in His Official

Capacity as an Agent and/or Repo Officer for

Toyota Motor Credit Company, Toyota Motor

Credit Corporation, and/or Entity, et al.,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

PERRY LONDON, Individually and Official Capacity as a Bail Bondsman; LONDON BAIL BONDING

INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY COMPANY, London Bonding

Agency, Inc., and/or Entity, et al; DENNIS

COX, Individually and in His Official Capacity

as a Bailman and Bounty Hunter, an Agent of

London Bail Bonding International Fidelity

Company, London Bonding Agency, Inc., and/or

Equity, et al.; DENNIS COX, Individually and

in His official capacity as a Private Detective, Private Investigator, Agent and Owner of

Harford Bureau of Investigation & Process,

Ltd., and/or Entity, et al; HARFORD BUREAU OF

INVESTIGATIONS COMPANY, Harford Bureau of

Investigations & Process, Ltd., and/or Entity

et al.,

Defendants.
2

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA95-1629-DKC)

Submitted: July 25, 1996 Decided: August 7, 1996

Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lebon Bruce Walker, Patricia Annette Lee-Walker, Appellants Pro Se.

Michael N. Russo, Jr., FERGUSON, SCHETELICH, HEFFERNAN & MURDOCK,

P.A., Baltimore, Maryland; Francis Joseph Gorman, GORMAN &

WILLIAMS, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal the district court order denying their

motions for entry of default, to lift stay, and for partial summary

judgment; dismissing their claims for damages under 42 U.S.C. §§

1985(3) and 1986 (1988); granting Toyota Motor Credit Company's

motion to dismiss; partly granting Dennis Cox's motion to dismiss;

and staying other aspects of the case pending discovery. We dismiss

the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not

appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and

collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1988); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b);

Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The

order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable

interlocutory or collateral order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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.

DISMISSED
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 15 (Friday, January 24, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 8165]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01748]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, February 5, 2025, at 9:00 a.m.; Thursday, 
February 6, 2025, at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: Washington, DC, at U.S. Postal Service Headquarters, 475 
L'Enfant Plaza SW, in the Benjamin Franklin Room.

STATUS: Wednesday, February 5, 2025, at 9:00 a.m.--Closed. Thursday, 
February 6, 2025, at 10:00 a.m.--Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Meeting of the Board of Governors

Wednesday, November 13, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. (Closed)

    1. Strategic Matters.
    2. Financial and Operational Matters.
    3. Compensation and Personnel Matters.
    4. Administrative Items.

Thursday, November 14, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. (Open)

    1. Remarks of the Chairman of the Board of Governors.
    2. Remarks of the Postmaster General and CEO.
    3. Approval of the Minutes.
    4. Committee Reports.
    5. Quarterly Financial Report.
    6. Quarterly Service Performance Report.
    7. Approval of Tentative Agenda for the May 8, 2025 Meeting.
    8. Adjournment.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Michael J. Elston, Secretary of 
the Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 
20260-1000. Telephone: (202) 268-4800.

Michael J. Elston,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-01748 Filed 1-22-25; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 6, 2013

NO. 03-11-00260-CV

Spicewood Springs Road Tunnel Coalition, a Texas Unincorporated Association;

Joe Wheeler; and Save Our Springs Alliance, Inc., Appellants

v.

Lee Leffingwell, Mayor; Mike Martinez; Randi Shade; Sheryl Cole; Laura Morrison;

Bill Spelman; and Chris Riley, Council Members; Marc Ott, City Manager,

in Their Official Capacities for the City of Austin; and the City of Austin, Appellees

APPEAL FROM 250TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, HENSON AND GOODWIN

JUSTICE HENSON NOT PARTICIPATING

REVERSED AND REMANDED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being 

considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that there was error in the trial court’s 

judgment: IT IS THEREFORE considered, adjudged and ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings. It is FURTHER ordered 

that the appellee pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below; and 

that this decision be certified below for observance.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1689

IRMA WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DAVID SABO; CYNTHIA BREYFOGLE; MARYANN CURL; CAROLE RIVERS; 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger,

District Judge. (1:11-cv-00219-MR-DLH)

Submitted: November 2, 2012 Decided: November 7, 2012

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George W. Saenger, ADAMS, HENDON, CARSON, CROW & SAENGER, PA, 

Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne M. Tompkins, 

United States Attorney, Paul B. Taylor, Assistant United States 

Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Irma Williams appeals the district court’s order 

adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to substitute the 

United States as the party Defendant and dismissing her civil 

action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. See Williams v. Sabo, No. 1:11-cv-00219-MR-DLH

(W.D.N.C. Apr. 25, 2012). 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