alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Thomas M. JAMES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles L. RYAN; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-15918.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 24, 2011.*

Filed June 8, 2011.

Thomas M. James, Douglas, AZ, pro se.

Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Thomas M. James, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that a prison policy banning sexually explicit materials violated his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. *Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We vacate and remand.

James alleges that the prison policy banned sexually explicit publications and all nudity in publications and photos. We are unable to say at this early stage of the proceeding that James cannot state a claim for a First Amendment violation. *See Dunn v. Castro,*621 F.3d 1196, 1205 n. 7 (9th Cir.2010). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

We do not consider James’s arguments, including those related to retaliation and amendments to the policy, raised for the first time on appeal. *See Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. ConocoPhillips Co.,*546 F.3d 1142, 1146 (9th Cir.2008).

James’s “Motion for Status” filed on October 14, 2010 is denied as moot.

James’s “Motion for leave of Court; Motion for enlargement of Time” filed on October 14, 2010 is denied because it does not appear to relate to this appeal. *805James shall bear his costs on appeal.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
MYL_EX10.56(a)_2014.12.31-10K






Exhibit 10.56(a)
	
		
	 
	

	 
	1000 Mylan Boulevard
Canonsburg, PA 15317 USA
Phone    724.514.1800
Fax    724.514.1870
Web    mylan.com






One-Time Special Five-Year 
Performance-Based Realizable Value Incentive Program




Dear [l]:


On February 25, 2014, Mylan Inc. (the “Company”) granted you a special award of stock appreciation rights (the “One-Time Performance-Based Award”) under the Company’s 2003 Long Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”).  The One-Time Performance-Based Award provides for the possibility of accelerated vesting upon a Change in Control of the Company (as such term is defined in the Plan).  By executing this letter agreement, for good and valuable consideration (including your continued employment and continued participation in the Company’s incentive plans and programs), you acknowledge and agree that the transactions consummated pursuant to the Business Transfer Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of July 13, 2014, by and among Abbott Laboratories, an Illinois corporation, the Company and the other parties thereto, as such agreement may be amended from time to time, shall not constitute a Change in Control for any purpose of the One-Time Performance-Based Award.  All other provisions of the One-Time Performance-Based Award, as modified by the foregoing, shall remain in full force and effect notwithstanding this letter agreement.


	
			
	 
	MYLAN INC.,

	 
	By

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	Name:   

	 
	 
	Title:   






Acknowledged and agreed:




_____________________________
Name:
© Compleretems 1, 2, and 3.

DAgent reeded and route as specified below.
'®@ Print your name and address on the reverse x

‘so that we can return the card to you. D1 Ades
B. Received by 9) Cc Date of Delivery LCEIPT AND RETURN
T wetelice_| Servis U.S, Manshal”

@ Attach this card to the beak ee ne mafpiece,
1. Article Addressed to: D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? C) Yes oe eer

‘or on the front If space permits.
''YES, enter delivery address below: [] No COURT CASE NUMBER
Hote 1:16-CV-138
Dar URS Tée 4/ielle —

t
ERIPTION OF P ROPER vi ‘TO SEH OR CONDEMN

AL Boece oon i? ¢o , .
na mt 3, Service Type 1 Prony Mat Expree® Houston 2
Ha ee a oo
9590 9408 0285 5155 5969 09 Maio cedpaneny YL oeee hacer Yess. 3 =
C Collect on Delivery oO TH
2. Articia Niumber (Transfer from service label) 1 Colect on Detvery Restricted Detvery  Slanature Confirmation " Sedoahtne HS z Oo
7015 Ob40 O007 8471 84903 hein a _,fiesticted Detvery | served with this =
—_ =
PS Form 3811, April 2015 PSN 7530-021000-9053 Ritu Receipt {Number of parties ibe” a

PsIOR ASF in Ore rg, ET served inthis case &

Check for service
on USA.

LL

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE (Include Business and Alternate
All Tetephone Numbers, and Estimated Times Available for Service):

Fold

Fold

ature oF Attorney other Originator requesting service on behalf of OO ptamnipr ° TELEPHONE NUMBER DATE

C) DEFENDANT
SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF U.S. MARSHAL ONLY-- DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE

acknowledge receipt for the total | ‘To Distrietof | District to | Signature of Authorized USMS Deputy or Date
number of process indicated Origin Ley | Si

(Sign only for USM 285 if mare 6 ) g 1)
than owe USM 285 is submitted) | __C A Nos y

Thereby certify and return that 1] nave oersonaly served DX have legal evidence of service, 1] have executed as shown in" Sta pecs described
on the individual , company, corporation, etc, at the address fron above on the on the individual , eampany, corporation, etc. shown at the address inserted below.

1 thereby certify and retum

Name and titie of individual served (if not shown above) C1 A person of suitable age and discretion
then residing in defendant's usual place
of abode

Address (complete only different than shown above) Date» Ti g
am
?/1,/ Gola Hira

*®.
Signaturé of US. (OR),

at am unable to locate the individual, company, corporation, ete. named above (See remarks below)

Total Mileage Charges| Forwarding Fee | Total Charges) [Advance Deposits | Amount owed to US. Marshal* or
including endeavors) (Amount of Refind*)

= ° —

RE wanes CY “afte 8

1 CL we OF THE BU
2. USMS RECORD
3. NOTICE OF SERVICE
4 BILLING STATEMENT®*: To be returned to the U.S. Marshal with payment,

if any amount is owed, Please remit promptly payable to U.S. Marshal Form USM-285
5, ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT Rev, 12/80

$0.00

“Ttg S \le4obo'l £41640

PRIOR EDITIONS MAY BE USED
#### Charles E. BOYLES, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON, Director of Prisons, Respondent—Appellee, Commonwealth of Virginia, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 06-6261.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 20, 2006.

Decided: April 26, 2006.

Charles E. Boyles, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Charles E. Boyles, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); *Reid v. Angelone,*369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir.2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or *211wrong. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Boyles has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Boyles’ motion for appointment of counsel and his motion to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. 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.*
#### In the Matter of Ronald Robinson, Respondent, v Harold J. Smith, as Superintendent of Attica Correctional Facility, et al., Appellants.

— Judgment unanimously affirmed (see, *People ex rel. Corcoran v Smith,*105 AD2d 1142). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Newman, J. — art 78.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and O’Donnell, JJ.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of -- ) 

) 

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. ) 

) 

Under Contract No. DAAA09-02-D-0007 ) 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 59557 

Jason N. Workmaster, Esq. 

Covington & Burling LLP 

Washington, DC 

E. Michael Chiaparas, Esq. 

DCMA Chief Trial Attorney 

Srikanti Schaffner, Esq. 

Trial Attorney 

Defense Contract Management Agency 

Carson, CA 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute which is the subject of the appeal having been settled, the appeal is 

hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 1 September 2015 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59557, Appeal of Kellogg Brown & 

Root Services, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
#### Alvaro PULIDO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-72486.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Sumitted May 24, 2011.*

Filed June 8, 2011.

*818Jose Alfredo Hernandez, Esquire, Santa Ana, CA, for Petitioner.

James Eugene Grimes, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Alvaro Pulido, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings held in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, *Salta v. INS,*314 F.3d 1076, 1078 (9th Cir.2002), we grant the petition for review.

The agency abused its discretion in denying Pulido’s motion to reopen where he rebutted the presumption of effective service by submitting sworn declarations explaining why he and his wife had not received the Notice to Appear (“NTA”), and the record did not contain proof of attempted delivery to Pulido’s address. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1229(c) (service of NTA by mail is sufficient if there is proof of attempted delivery to alien’s last address); *Arrieta v. INS,*117 F.3d 429, 432 (9th Cir.1997) (letter by petitioner is substantial and probative evidence that may rebut presumption of effective service).

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
---

May 2, 2016

VIA EDGAR

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

|Re: | Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the "Company")
|--- | ----------------------------------------------
|    |                                               
|    | Annual Report on Form 20-F                    
|    |                                               
|    | Consent of Expert                             

This letter is provided in connection with the Company's Form
20-F annual report for the year ended December 31, 2015, (the Annual Report)
to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission (the SEC).

I, J. David Gaunt, P.Geo., hereby consent to the use of my name
in connection with reference to my involvement in the following technical report
(the "Technical Report"):

- 2014 Technical Report on the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska, USA,
  effective date December 31, 2014

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof,
in the Annual Report and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the
information derived from the Technical Report related to me in the Annual Report
and in Registration Statement No. 333-209921 on Form F-3.

I have read the Companys Annual Report and confirm that it
documents fairly and accurately represents the information that supports the
disclosure.

Yours truly,

J. David Gaunt



J. David Gaunt, P.Geo.

Hunter Dickinson Services Inc.

---
# L_2008136EN.01005201.xml

| 24.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 136/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 136/52

---

Corrigendum to Commission Directive 2008/42/EC of 3 April 2008 amending Council Directive 76/768/EEC, concerning cosmetic products, for the purpose of adapting Annexes II and III thereto to technical progress

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 93 of 4 April 2008
  )

On page 21, Annex III amended, column d ‘Maximum authorised concentration in the finished cosmetic product’, reference number 164:

for:

| ‘(b) | 0,02’, |
| --- | --- |

‘(b)

read:

‘
  0,02
  ’.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0586 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JACOB CHRISTIAN PALMER ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 27, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 20 2022

05/20/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0586
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Invasive Insect Biocontrol & Behavior Laboratory: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Beltsville, Maryland (BARC) Beltsville Agricultural Research Center Invasive Insect Biocontrol & Behavior Laboratory





- ARS News & Events
- AgResearch Magazine
- Image Gallery
- News

Newsheadline bar    ARS News Articles  USDA's Agricultural Research Service Honors Scientists of the YearApr 05, 2022Bioinsecticide-minded Researchers Prospect for Purple-Pigmented BacteriumApr 20, 2020Coconut Oil Compounds Repel Insects Better than DEETOct 31, 2018Tick Control Program Reveals High Level of Infection in White-Footed MiceApr 24, 2018Collaring the Mice that Carry Lyme Disease-Causing TicksSep 05, 2017If It Smells Like a Petunia or Shampoo, It Might Be a PesticideJun 19, 2017ARS Leads New Lyme Disease Control Efforts in Howard County, Md.Jan 31, 2017ARS Honors Scientists of the YearSep 07, 2016Learning What Wood a Termite PrefersNov 12, 2015Certain Compounds Stimulate Mosquito Taste ReceptorsNov 24, 2014USDA Researchers Identify Stink Bug AttractantNov 17, 2014Deterring Ticks with Citrus and MillipedesMar 08, 2013Studying Bed Bug Actions for New Management TacticsFeb 11, 2013Combating USDA's Top-ranked Invasive InsectJan 07, 2013Work With Us HomeJan 01, 0001


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
**Exhibit 13.01**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Genetic Technologies Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas Godfrey Howitt, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

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

 

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

 
|                         |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Name: Thomas G. Howitt  |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

 

November 21, 2011

 

----
#### McCULLOUGH, Respondent, v. McCREADY et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November 8, 1907.)

Action by Joseph J. McCullough against Charles McCready and others. J. T. Ryan, for appellants. W. F. Clare, for respondent.

No opinion. Determination (52 Misc. Rep. 542, 102 N. Y. Supp. 633) affirmed, with costs, with leave to defendants to withdraw demurrer and to answer, on payment of costs in this court and in the court below. Order filed.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2286 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on cases for certain children’s 

products. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 11, 2005 

Ms. HARMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on cases for 

certain children’s products. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CASES FOR CERTAIN CHILDREN’S PRODUCTS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.01.81 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended 

6 by striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2008’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

8 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 
2 

•HR 2286 IH 

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7136

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

STEVEN DONEWAN CARR,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,

District Judge. (5:98-cr-00246-RLV-2; 5:03-cv-00030-RLV)

Submitted: October 11, 2007 Decided: October 18, 2007

Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven Donewan Carr, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Scott Broyles,

Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Steven Donewan Carr seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Carr has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny his motion for a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
Ex 10e15 2014 10-K






EXHIBIT 10(e)15


BASE SALARIES OF NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS


MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY


The following are the annual base salaries, effective March 1, 2015, unless otherwise noted, of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Mississippi Power Company and certain other executive officers of Mississippi Power Company who served during 2014.




	
		
	G. Edison Holland, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer
	$678,480

	Moses Feagin
Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
	$263,280

	John W. Atherton
Vice President
	$267,651

	Jeff G. Franklin
Vice President
	$265,125

	John C. Huggins*
Vice President 
	$212,513






*    Retired February 20, 2015.  Salary shown was Mr. Huggins’ salary effective March 1, 2014.
#### PEOPLE, Appellant, v. ROCHESTER & KETTLE FALLS LAND CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

March 26, 1898.)

Action by the people of the state of New York .against the Rochester & Kettle Falls Land Company.

Charles Roe, for appellant.

James G. Greene, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

FOLLETT, J.

I dissent, on the ground that the evidence conclusively shows that the defendant was insolvent when this action was begun, and was insolvent at the time of the trial. The judgments which were obtained against the defendant have been satisfied by giving the notes of the corporation, indorsed by individuals. The land owned by the defendant is shown to be of little value, and is incumbered by a mortgage on which there is at least due $31,000. The amount of the taxes unpaid on this land is not definitely disclosed, but the last annual report put in evidence, and dated January 29, 1897, states “that the unpaid taxes on said lands do not exceed $5,000,” and there is no evidence that these taxes had been paid or reduced at the date of the trial. There is no evidence that the defendant has any property except this land, incumbered by the mortgage and the taxes, which, from the evidence, is not worth the amount of the incumbrances. The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.