alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order to Pay Supp. EAJA fees 6:15 CV -02317-CL Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

RYAN NEWBY

Plaintiff, Civ. No. 6:15-cv-02317- CL

 

v. ORDER TO PAY

 SUPPLEMENTAL EAJA FEES

NANCY A. BERRYHILL, 

(Acting) COMMISSIONER

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant.

_____________________________ 

McShane, Judge:

Based on Plaintiff’s Motion, and representation that it is unopposed by Defendant and 

pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act 28 U.S.C. § 2412, $2,576.74 is hereby 

awarded to Plaintiff as Supplemental EAJA fees, and the check for Supplemental

EAJA fees shall be made payable to Nancy J. Meserow, based upon Plaintiff’s 

assignment of these amounts to Plaintiff’s attorney, after the satisfaction of Plaintiff's 

debts, if any, under Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010).Any check issued shall 

be mailed to Plaintiff’s counsel, Nancy J. Meserow, at her office: 

Law Office of Nancy J. Meserow:

7540 S.W. 51st Ave.

Portland, OR 

97219
Order to Pay Supp. EAJA fees 6:15 CV -02317-CL Page 2

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 15ht day of November, 2017.

_s/Michael J. McShane 

Michael J. McShane

 United States District Court Judge
2012 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

11-29-2012

Thomas Davis v.;Unum Grp

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 11-4376

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2012

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2012 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Thomas Davis v.;Unum Grp" (2012). 2012 Decisions. Paper 108.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2012/108
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

____________

No. 11-4376

_____________

THOMAS P. DAVIS; 

BRUCE D. REITMAN; 

ANNE COOLIDGE GERKEN;

MARVINA JENKINS

v.

UNUM GROUP, and its Predecessors and Subsidiaries, 

including UnumProvident Corporation, Unum Corporation, 

Provident Companies, Inc., Provident Life and Accident 

Insurance Company, The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, 

The Paul Revere Corporation

 Thomas P. Davis,

 Appellant

______________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

(D.C. Civil No. 03-cv-00940)

District Judge: Honorable Jan E. Dubois

____________

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

November 2, 2012

____________

Before: SLOVITER, AMBRO and BARRY, Circuit Judges

(Opinion Filed: November 29, 2012)
2

____________

OPINION

____________

BARRY, Circuit Judge

Thomas P. Davis had been receiving disability insurance benefits for almost ten 

years when, in February 2001, those benefits were terminated. He filed suit in February 

2003, and thereupon commenced the long and torturous history of this case, even though, 

in 2004, his employer had reversed itself and agreed to pay Davis all benefits as well as 

interest and attorney’s fees. 

That long history now culminates in this appeal. Davis argues that the District 

Court erred in concluding that he lacked standing to maintain his RICO claim, the only 

claim before us, and erred in concluding that he had not “pled and proffered” facts 

sufficient to withstand summary judgment on that claim. (Appellant’s Br. at 4). We 

exercise plenary review over a grant of summary judgment. Albright v. Virtue, 273 F.3d 

564, 570 (3d Cir. 2001). 

Given that we write primarily for the parties, we need not reprise the long history 

of this case nor do we find it necessary to detail the various reasons why Davis contends 

his arguments should prevail and why UNUM Group contends they should not. We have 

carefully reviewed all of those contentions, the applicable law, and the record of this case. 

Suffice it to say that, substantially for the reasons set forth in the excellent Opinion of the 

District Court, we will affirm.
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
 Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory: Mandan, ND
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Employment
                        Work With Us
                                    ARS Vacancies at USDAJOBS
                    Local News
                        INTEGRATOR
                                    Bottom Line Ag SummitSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Mandan, North Dakota Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory Docs





- Research Scientists
- Research Programs and Projects at this Location

Dr. John Hendrickson's Presentationheadline bar  New Forage Releases and ManagementIf the video doesn't automatically play after 5 seconds, click the play button.


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
### Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website

(r eleased the week prior to May 4, 2021 

### )

The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES :

A

- 20

- 669 State v. White

A

- 20

- 816 State v. Strickland

The above

- listed memorandum opinions c an be viewed online through the appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebra ska.gov: http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/

.
Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here: http s ://www.nebraska.gov/courts/s c cales/

.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mark Mungen, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sharpe, J.), rendered October 25, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The jury’s verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see, People v Bigelow,*106 AD2d 448). Although the complainant’s testimony contained minor inconsistencies, its accuracy and credibility was for the jury to determine *(People v Ragins,*109 AD2d 806; *People v Bigelow, supra),*and there is no basis in the record at bar to warrant this court’s interference with that determination.

The sentence the defendant received was not unduly harsh or excessive, and there are no extraordinary circumstances present which would warrant disturbance of the sentencing court’s exercise of discretion *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80).

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be either without merit or unpreserved for appellate review. Mangano, J. P., Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 18

- 00093

- CR

LANE WESLEY KELLER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 8th District Court

Hopkins County, Texas

Trial Court No. 1726246

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Lane Wesley Keller has filed a motion to dismiss th is appeal. As authorized by

Rule 42.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure , we grant the motion. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P.

42.2(a).

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: July 24, 2018

Date Decided: July 25, 2018

Do Not Publish
Exhibit 99.1

  Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Peter J. Minihane, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive
officer and principal financial officer) of Visual Networks, Inc. (the
"Registrant"), certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon review of
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 of the
Registrant (the "Report"):

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

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


      /s/ Peter J. Minihane
-------------------------------------
Name:          Peter J. Minihane
Date:          November 14, 2002
# L_2010210DE.01003602.xml

| 11.8.2010 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 210/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2010

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 210/36

---

Berichtigung der Richtlinie 2009/164/EU der Kommission vom 22. Dezember 2009 zur Änderung von Anhang II und III der Richtlinie 76/768/EWG des Rates über kosmetische Mittel zwecks Anpassung an den technischen Fortschritt

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 344 vom 23. Dezember 2009
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 344 vom 23. Dezember 2009

Auf Seite 41, Erwägungsgrund 1:

anstatt:

„konkretes und reines Blütenöl der Verbena“

muss es heißen:

„Concrète und Absolue der Verbena“.

Auf Seite 41, Erwägungsgrund 2, dritte Zeile:

anstatt:

„reine Blütenöl“

muss es heißen:

„Absolue“.

Auf Seite 41, Erwägungsgrund 2, sechste Zeile:

anstatt:

„reine Blütenöl“

muss es heißen:

„Absolue“.

Auf Seite 41, Erwägungsgrund 2, dreizehnte Zeile:

anstatt:

„des reinen Blütenöls“

muss es heißen:

„von Verbena Absolue“.

Auf Seite 43, Anhang, Nummer 1, dritte Zeile:

anstatt:

„reines Blütenöl“

muss es heißen:

„Verbena Absolue“.

Auf Seite 43, Anhang, Nummer 2, Buchstabe b, Spalte b:

anstatt:

„reines Blütenöl der Verbena“

muss es heißen:

„Verbena Absolue“.

---
#### Charles Bobrowsky et al., Respondents-Appellants, v Irwin J. Landes et al., Appellants-Respondents.

In our view, the affidavit of the plaintiff Charles Bobrowsky and the accompanying exhibits submitted to Special Term in support of the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment established that there was no willful breach of the contract of sale by virtue of the fact that the proposed mortgagee, which had issued a mortgage commitment within the time specified in *619the contract, subsequently revoked the commitment after being advised by the plaintiffs prior to the scheduled closing date that there was a substantial change in their financial circumstances. We find that the material facts in *Lane v Elwood Estates*(31 AD2d 949, *affd*28 NY2d 620) are indistinguishable from those at bar and disagree with Special Term insofar as it found that there was a triable issue of fact on the question of the plaintiffs’ good faith in attempting to satisfy the condition precedent of obtaining financing on the terms stated in the contract of sale. It is evident that the plaintiffs’ loss of income resulted from circumstances beyond their control *(see, Patterson v Marchese,*10 AD2d 639, 640).

Based upon the foregoing, we need not address whether the liquidated damages provision contained in the contract of sale was enforceable, since, by its terms, it only became effective in the event of the plaintiffs’ willful default. Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Niehoff and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1



Exhibit 11.1

                              CARNEGIE GROUP, INC.

                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                          6 months ended                 3 months ended
                                                              June 30,                       June 30,
                                                      ------------------------       ------------------------
                                                          1998         1997              1998         1997
                                                      -----------   ----------       -----------   ----------
<S>                                                  <C>           <C>               <C>          <C>
                 Net income (loss)                    $(2,060,379)  $  909,756       $   171,802   $  521,509
                                                      ===========   ==========       ===========   ==========
                 Weighted average common shares
                      outstanding                        6,512,252   6,287,407          6,528,036   6,296,648
                 Effect of dilutive shares
                      outstanding                          309,564     642,635            310,593     608,700
                                                      -----------   ----------       -----------   ----------
                 Dilutive shares outstanding             6,821,816   6,930,042          6,838,629   6,905,348
                                                      ============  ==========       ============  ==========
                 Earnings (loss) per common share
                      Basic                                $(0.32)       $0.14            $ 0.03        $0.08
                                                           ======        =====            ======        =====
                      Diluted                              $(0.32)       $0.13            $ 0.03        $0.08
                                                           ======        =====            ======        =====
</TABLE>
Indigenous Epistemologies for Land Tellings, 

Restoration, and Change.

Glen Canyon Monitoring and Research Center and Reclamation Annual Meeting

January 12, 2022

Dr. Doreen E. Martinez, Associate Professor

Colorado State University

ancient Indigenous consciousness

* discusses a process of 

knowing that honors and 

integrates the past; 

embeds reciprocity of the 

present and encapsulates 

a responsibility to the 

future. 
Land Tellings for Restoration and Change

 Indigenous Epistemologies

Seeing

Being-with (relatives and responsibilities; dirty theory)

 Natural Reason and Natural Law

Land as Pedagogy: learn from and learn with

 Deep logic and deep co-existence

Snow
Indigenous Consciousness: 

Ancient Being-With

 However, I argue that 

Indigenous 

consciousness 

expands and adds to 

these oppositional 

ideologies because it 

recognizes and 

acknowledges a 

consciousness that 

existed prior to 

“dominant ideologies.”
Indigenous Beliefs

* Because everything in the [I]ndigenous world is interrelated ... All 

forces, both animate and inanimate, must be taken into account in 

order... to remain in good health -physically, emotionally, socially 

and spiritually (Lobo and Talbot 1998:366).

Indigenous Ways of Knowing

* exploring how knowledge and knowledge expectations (also 

known as science) are practiced.

* in content; listening to the wind

* in process (move the plant) 

* promote system changes and ultimately overall systems health 

for people, places and animals
Deep 

coexistence

Seeks 

knowings for 

stewardship
Principles 

and 

Practices of 

Indigeneity

aka Being 

Radical
Radical Indigeneity: Multiplying Knowledges, 

Serving the Collective

 Tellings

Who are your knowers?

Where is knowing offered?

Land tellings (land is

more than land)

 Change as adaptation as 

natural, necessary

 Exponential realities



How do we 

know what 

we know?
Knowing 

through 

Seeing 

through 

Being-With


Feed the Curious: the Great Mystery

Southern theory – “Our 

interest as researchers is to 

maximize the wealth of 

materials that are drawn into 

the analysis and explanation. 

It is also our interest to 

multiply, rather than slim 

down, the theoretical ideas 

that we have to work with. ... 

that includes multiplying the 

local sources of our thinking.” 

Connell
Land Knowings, 

Lessons and Truths: 

Generalizable, Specific, 

and Necessary

 Agriculture

Agriculture heritage

Land practices

 Acre

 Salmon
Knowings and Adaptation

 Personhood Status

values and beliefs 

 Rights of Nature

 Firehawks

 Food Sovereignty

 Land mitigation and restoration

Adaptation and Change


Knowings and 

Adaptation: 

Humility, Generosity 

and Respect
Knowings and Adaptation: Humility, 

Generosity and Respect
Avoid knowledge extraction
Questions?
Exhibit 31.3



CERTIFICATIONS



I, Sam Kraynek, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Thanksgiving Coffee Company, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 small business issuers other certifying officers 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 registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and



c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business
issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers
internal control over financial reporting; and



Date: November 12, 2004



|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Sam Kraynek                      
|    |  | Sam Kraynek (Chief Financial Officer)
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                               C-CAR SUBSIDIARIES



PERFORMANCE DODGE, INC.,
an Oklahoma corporation


PERFORMANCE NISSAN, INC.,
an Oklahoma corporation


CROSS COUNTRY DODGE, INC.,
D/B/A LYNN HICKEY DODGE,
an Oklahoma corporaztion


QUALITY NISSAN, INC.,
a Texas corporation


MIDWAY CHEVROLET, INC.,
a Texas corporation


PLAINS CHEVROLET, INC.,
a Texas corporation


WESTGATE CHEVROLET, INC.,
a Texas corporation


ALLIED 2000 COLLISION CENTER, INC.,
a Texas corporation


WORKING MAN'S CREDIT PLAN, INC.,
a Texas corporation


C-CAR AUTO WHOLESALERS, INC.,
an Oklahoma corporation
# L_2017216DE.01002701.xml

| 22.8.2017 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 216/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2017

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 216/27

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 552/2009 der Kommission vom 22. Juni 2009 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1907/2006 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates zur Registrierung, Bewertung, Zulassung und Beschränkung chemischer Stoffe (REACH) hinsichtlich Anhang XVII

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 164 vom 26. Juni 2009
  )

Seite 18, Anhang zur Änderung von Anhang XVII der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1907/2006, Nummer 2 Tabelle Nummer 23 Cadmium CAS-Nr. 7440-43-9 EG-Nr. 231-152-8 und seine Verbindungen, Spalte 2 Absatz 5 Unterabsatz 3:

Anstatt:

„Das Inverkehrbringen von cadmierten Erzeugnissen oder von Bestandteilen solcher Erzeugnisse, die in den in den vorstehenden Buchstaben a und b genannten Sektoren bzw. zu den dort genannten Zwecken eingesetzt werden, sowie das Inverkehrbringen von gewerblichen Erzeugnissen, die in den unter dem vorstehenden Buchstaben b genannten Sektoren hergestellt wurden, ist auf jeden Fall — unabhängig von ihrer Verwendung oder endgültigen Bestimmung — verboten.“

muss es heißen:

„Das Inverkehrbringen von cadmierten Erzeugnissen oder von Bestandteilen solcher Erzeugnisse, die in den in den vorstehenden Buchstaben a und b genannten Sektoren bzw. zu den dort genannten Zwecken eingesetzt werden, sowie das Inverkehrbringen von Erzeugnissen, die in den unter dem vorstehenden Buchstaben b genannten Sektoren hergestellt wurden, ist auf jeden Fall — unabhängig von ihrer Verwendung oder endgültigen Bestimmung — verboten.“

Seite 18, Anhang zur Änderung von Anhang XVII der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1907/2006, Nummer 2 Tabelle Nummer 23 Cadmium CAS-Nr. 7440-43-9 EG-Nr. 231-152-8 und seine Verbindungen, Spalte 2 Absatz 6 einleitende Worte:

Anstatt:

„Absatz 5 gilt ferner für cadmierte Erzeugnisse oder Bestandteile solcher Erzeugnisse, die in den in den nachstehenden Buchstaben a und b genannten Sektoren bzw. zu den dort genannten Zwecken eingesetzt werden, sowie für gewerbliche Erzeugnisse, die in den unter dem vorstehenden Buchstaben b genannten Sektoren hergestellt wurden:“

muss es heißen:

„Absatz 5 gilt ferner für cadmierte Erzeugnisse oder Bestandteile solcher Erzeugnisse, die in den in den nachstehenden Buchstaben a und b genannten Sektoren bzw. zu den dort genannten Zwecken eingesetzt werden, sowie für Erzeugnisse, die in den unter dem nachstehenden Buchstaben b genannten Sektoren hergestellt wurden:“

---