alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Gregory C. KRUG, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America; Eric H. Holder, Jr., U.S. Attorney General; Harley G. Lappin, Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons; John M. Bales, U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of Texas, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 11-40016

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 30, 2011.

*951Gregory C. Krug, Atlanta, GA, pro se.

Before KING, JOLLY, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Gregory C. Krug appeals the dismissal of his suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for lack of jurisdiction. He argues that his suit was not barred by the exception to the FTCA’s waiver of sovereign immunity in 28 U.S.C. § 2680(c) for any claim arising from the detention of goods by a law enforcement officer because he alleges that a Bureau of Prisons (BOP) employee stole his property.

We review the district court’s dismissal of an action based on exceptions to the FTCA de novo, accepting all of the plaintiffs well-pleaded factual allegations as true. *Jeanmarie v. United States,*242 F.3d 600, 602 (5th Cir.2001). To survive a motion to dismiss, the plaintiff must plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” *Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,*550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007); *Lane v. Halliburton,*529 F.3d 548, 557 (5th Cir.2008).

Possession of his property by a BOP employee, even if unauthorized, tortious, or wrongful, constitutes a detention within the meaning of § 2680(c) and is remotely related to a BOP employee’s duties in inspecting and inventorying prisoner property. *See Chapa v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice,*339 F.3d 388, 391 (5th Cir.2003); *Capozzoli v. Tracey,*663 F.2d 654, 658 (5th Cir.1981). Krug has failed to demonstrate that the district court erred in dismissing his suit for lack of jurisdiction as barred by § 2680(c).

The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of Appeals2859810-FEB-201208:07 AM
Exhibit 99.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. SS. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Advanced Gaming  Technology,
Inc., (the "Company") on Form 10- QSB for the period ending  September 30, 2002,
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  I, Gary Cain, Chief Financial Officer (or the equivalent thereof) of
the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge
and belief:

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

         (2)   the information  contained in the Repor fairly  presents,  in all
               material  respects,   the  financial   condition  and  result  of
               operations of the Company.


                            /s/ Gary Cain
                            ---------------------------------------------------
                            Gary Cain
                            Chief Financial Officer (or the equivalent thereof)
                            November 12, 2002
# C_2019270EN.01003501.xml

| 12.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 270/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 270/35

---

Action brought on 12 June 2019 — Polisario Front v Council

(Case T-356/19)

(2019/C 270/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguia el-Hamra and Rio de Oro (Polisario Front) (represented by: G. Devers, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare its action for annulment admissible; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare its action for annulment admissible;

| — | annul the contested regulation; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested regulation;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action brought against Council Regulation (EU) 2019/440 of 29 November 2018 on the allocation of fishing opportunities under the Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco and the Implementation Protocol thereto (OJ 2019 L 77, p.1), the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging lack of legal basis of that regulation on account of the illegality of Decision 2019/441.

That plea is divided into eleven parts which are essentially identical to the eleven pleas in Case T-344/19, Polisario Front v Council.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 151 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 151

Congratulating the University of Minnesota Duluth men's ice hockey team 
on winning their first National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) 
             Division I Men's Hockey National Championship.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 14, 2011

Ms. Klobuchar submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Congratulating the University of Minnesota Duluth men's ice hockey team 
on winning their first National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) 
             Division I Men's Hockey National Championship.

Whereas on Saturday, April 9, 2011, the University of Minnesota Duluth won the 
        2011 NCAA Division I Men's Ice Hockey Championship;
Whereas this is the first national championship for the University of Minnesota 
        Duluth Bulldogs men's ice hockey team (the ``University of Minnesota 
        Duluth'');
Whereas the University of Minnesota Duluth won the Frozen Four championship game 
        with a 3 to 2 sudden death win over the University of Michigan;
Whereas on Thursday, April 7, 2011, the University of Minnesota Duluth defeated 
        the University of Notre Dame in the Frozen Four semifinal game with a 
        score of 4 to 3 to advance to the national championship game;
Whereas the game was played before a sellout crowd of more than 19,200 fans at 
        the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul, Minnesota;
Whereas the University of Minnesota Duluth finished the 2010-2011 season with 
        the most wins since the 2003-2004 season;
Whereas in the 2010-2011 season the University of Minnesota Duluth had the most 
        fans for a home schedule in 50 Division I seasons, averaging more than 
        6,800 fans;
Whereas the University of Minnesota Duluth never lost more than 1 game in a row, 
        a first in program history; and
Whereas the University of Minnesota Duluth had 6 wins and 1 loss in the 
        postseason, closing with 4 straight wins and beating the top 2 teams in 
        the Eastern College Athletic Conference in the East Regional and the top 
        2 teams in the Central Collegiate Hockey Association in the Frozen Four: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) recognizes the achievements of the players, coaches, 
        students, and staff whose hard work and dedication helped the 
        University of Minnesota Duluth win the 2011 NCAA Division I 
        Men's Hockey National Championship; and
            (2) recognizes University of Minnesota Duluth Chancellor 
        Lendley Black and Athletic Director Bob Nielson, who have shown 
        great leadership in bringing athletic success to the University 
        of Minnesota Duluth.
                                 <all>
```
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-16-0000025 23-MAR-2017 07:58 AM
Exhibit 14.1

This Code of Ethics (the "Code") has been adopted by the Board of Directors (the "Board") of Traffix, Inc. (the "Company") in accordance with the
requirements of Rule 406 of Regulation S-K promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the governance rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market, and summarizes the
standards applicable to the Company's employees, including its executive officers, and the members of the Board (the "Subject Parties").

As
a public company, it is of critical importance that filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and others be accurate and timely. The Subject Parties bear a special
responsibility for promoting integrity throughout the Company, with responsibilities to stakeholders both inside and outside of the Company. The Subject Parties have a special role both to adhere to
these principles themselves, and also to ensure that a culture exists throughout the Company as a whole that ensures the fair, timely and accurate reporting of the Company's financial results and
condition.

Because
of this special role, the Subject Parties are bound by this Code to:



Any
waiver of or amendment to this Code may only be made by the Board and will be promptly disclosed in accordance with applicable laws, rules and regulations. Requests for waivers of
any provision of this Code must be made in writing to the Board.

If
a Subject Party is faced with a difficult ethical decision or has doubts as to the appropriate course of action in a particular situation, he or she should consult with the Company's
General Counsel, the Board or the Committee. Each Subject Party will be held accountable for adherence to this Code. Violations of this Code, including failures to report actual or potential
violations by others, will be viewed by the Company as a severe disciplinary matter that may result in a personnel action, up to and including termination of employment. If a Subject Party believes
that a violation of this Code has occurred, he or she is required to promptly inform the Board or the Committee.

---

QuickLinks
#### Preview Construction Co., Inc., Appellant, v Chester Roth et al., Defendants, and Norman Frivoll et al., Respondents.

—In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for conversion and intentional interference with contract and/or prospective business relations, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.), entered July 10, 1984, which granted the motion of defendants Norman Frivoll, Odd Frivoll, and F. M. Frivoll Construction Corp. for judgment in their favor as a matter of law at the close of the plaintiff’s case.

*591Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff has not appealed from the judgment in this action in favor of defendants Chester and Frances Roth, which expressly held that no contract existed between plaintiff and the Roths. Plaintiff’s cause of action against respondents for intentional interference with the same alleged contract is therefore barred by collateral estoppel *(see, Israel v Wood Dolson Co.,*1 NY2d 116). In any event, plaintiff’s evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, fails to establish the necessary elements of either intentional interference with contract or intentional interference with prospective business relations *(see, Burns Jackson Miller Summit & Spitzer v Lindner,*88 AD2d 50, *affd*59 NY2d 314; *Guardian Life Corp. v Parker Hardware Mfg. Corp.,*50 NY2d 183). The same conclusion holds with respect to plaintiff’s cause of action against respondents for conversion. Therefore, all the causes of action against respondents were properly dismissed. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
#### MOON, Respondent, v. FURNACEVILLE IRON CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

February 6, 1898.)

Action by William Moon against the Furnaceville Iron Company.

No opinion-judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur, except ADAMS, J., not voting.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, John Mutch, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Peregrine Systems, Inc.;

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

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:



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



| |  | Date:                                                         |  | November 4, 2004
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------
| |  | /s/JOHN MUTCHJohn Mutch
President and Chief Executive Officer

---
Alexander John Neudeck has petitioned the Court to waive the three-year test 

requirement for the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE) for 

purposes of Neudeck's application for admission by motion to the State Bar of Montana. 

By rule, applicants for adrnission by motion must provide evidence of the requisite score 

on an MPRE taken "within three years preceding the date of the application for admission." 

Rule VII.A.9, Rules of Admission. 

Neudeck passed the MPRE in 1996 when seeking admission to the practice of law 

in the State of Colorado. The petition states that Neudeck has been practicing law "without 

ethical or disciplinary issues" since 1996. Good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition of Alexander John Neudeck to waive 

the three-year test requirement for the MPRE for purposes of Neudeck' s current application 

for admission by motion to the State Bar of Montana is GRANTED. 

The Clerk shall mail a copy of this order to Petitioner and to the Adrninistrator of 

the Board of Bar Examiners at the State Bar of Montana. 

DATED this 1.4- day of January, 2022. 

Chief Justice 

L 

FEB 1 5 2022 

BOVV&TI Greenwood 

Clerk of Suprerrio Court 

Sfz-2.ie - Montan2 
eS24 in .2.14,.. 

Justices 

2
# C_2019246EN.01003201.xml

| 22.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 246/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 246/32

---

Action brought on 20 May 2019 — BRF Singapore Foods v EUIPO — Tipiak (Sadia)

(Case T-309/19)

(2019/C 246/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BRF Singapore Foods Pte Ltd (Singapore, Singapore) (represented by: C. Mateu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Tipiak (Saint-Aignan de Grand Lieu, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark Sadia in colours black and white — Application for registration No 12 084 356

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 March 2019 in Case R 1834/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order Tipiak to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Tipiak to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of general EU principles of the sound administration and equal treatment; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of general EU principles of the sound administration and equal treatment;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
Former President George W. Bush was named as the original 1 lead respondent in this case. Pursuant to Federal R u l e of Civil Procedure 25(d), the Court automatically substitutes his successor, President Barack H. Obama, as the new lead respondent.

On January 22, 2009, Petitioner Hamdoon requested [Dkt. 2 No. 258] to Join Petitioner Bawazir’s Motion, and the request was (continued...) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

______________________________ MOHAMMED AL-ADAHI, et al., : : Petitioners, : : v. : Civil Action No. 05-280 (GK) : BARACK H. OBAMA, et al., : 1 : Respondents. : ______________________________: ORDER Petitioners Mohammad Ali Abdullah Bawazir (ISN 440) and Zahir Omar Khamis Bin Hamdoon (ISN 576) have been detained at the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, since shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. They both have habeas corpus petitions pending before the Court. Petitioners bring this action against Respondents in order to enjoin certain treatment that they are undergoing as a result of the voluntary hunger strikes they have undertaken to protest their length yd etentions without judicial scrutiny of the legality of such detentions. The matter is before the Court on Petitioners’ Renewed Emergency Motion for Injunction Against Further Torture of Mohammed Bawazir (“Renewed Emergency Mot.”) [Dkt. No. 234]. Upon 2(...continued) 2 granted. See Minute Order, Jan. 26, 2009. consideration of the Motion, Opposition, Reply, supplemental filings, oral argument, and the entire record herein, and for the

reas o n s s e t f o r t hi nt h e a c c o mp a n y i n gM e m o r a n d u mO p i n i o n, Petitioners’ Renewed Emergency Motion is denied .

February 10, 2009 /s/ Gladys Kessler United States District Judge Copies via ECF to all counsel of record
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent,

v. DANIEL GLENN ROADRUCK, Appellant. No. 70703-5- DIVISION ONE UNPUBLISHED OPINION 

### FILED: SEp - 2 2014
Per Curiam. Daniel Roadruck appeals the judgment and sentence entered on his convictions for two counts ofsecond degree burglary and one count ofsecond 

### degreecriminal trespass. He argues, and the Stateconcedes, that thejudgment and sentence contains a clerical error. We accept the concession of error and remand 

### solely to amend thejudgment and sentenceto state thatRoadruck wasconvicted of counts 3, 4, and 5 and that counts 1 and 2 were dismissed. Remanded. For the court: 

# ^TV\ote0 vf J

rO -T; -~ C=> —; r-
-a •??.'•-,-.

i 'J- "^ -.'• ~2P* —r, r:'i
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-2304

_____________________________

MICHEL ADIB ABDALLAH,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Steven B. Whittington, Judge.

April 11, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

William Mallory Kent, Jacksonville, for Appellant.
2

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Virginia Chester Harris, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Robyn Owens, Chief Financial Officer of GenoMed, Inc., certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of GenoMed, Inc.;

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

     3. Based on my knowledge,  the financial  statements,  and other  financial
information  included  in this annual  report,  fairly  present in all  material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
small  business  issuer as of, and for,  the  periods  presented  in this annual
report.

     4. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officer and I are  responsible for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))  for the small business  issuer and
have:

          a. designed such disclosure  controls and  procedures,  or caused such
     disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
     ensure that material  information  relating to the small  business  issuer,
     including  its  consolidated  subsidiaries,  is made  known to us by others
     within those entities,  particularly during the period in which this annual
     report is being prepared;

          b.  evaluated  the   effectiveness  of  the  small  business  issuer's
     disclosure  controls  and  procedures  and  presented  in this  report  our
     conclusions  about  the  effectiveness  of  the  disclosure   controls  and
     procedures,  as of the end of the period  covered by this  report  based on
     such evaluation; and

     5.  The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer  and I  have
disclosed,  based  on our  most  recent  evaluation  of  internal  control  over
financial  reporting,  to the small  business  issuer's  auditors  and the audit
committee  of the  small  business  issuer's  board  of  directors  (or  persons
performing the equivalent functions):

          a. all significant  deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
     or operation of internal  controls which are reasonably likely to adversely
     affect the small business  issuer's ability to record,  process,  summarize
     and report financial information; and

          b. any fraud,  whether or not material,  that  involves  management or
     other employees who have a significant role in the small business  issuer's
     internal control over financial reporting.

Date:    April 1, 2005

/s/ Robyn Owens
-------------------------
Robyn Owens
Chief Financial Officer