alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-30295

Conference Calendar

 

FRANK JOHNSON,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

BURL CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary;

RICHARD P. IEYOUB, Attorney General, State of Louisiana,

Respondents-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CV-3035-E

- - - - - - - - - -

October 22, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Frank Johnson, Louisiana prisoner # 105244, appeals the

district court’s denial of his federal petition for habeas

corpus. Johnson argued in the petition that his right to a fair

trial was violated when the trial judge ordered him restrained

during the jury trial.

 We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record

and find no reversible error in the denial of the petition. 
No. 97-30295

-2-

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate

judge and adopted by the district court. See Johnson v. Cain,

No. 96-3035 (E.D. La., Feb. 6, 1997). 

 AFFIRMED.
Case 1:07-cv-05416-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/08/2008 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05416-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/08/2008 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05416-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/08/2008 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05416-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/08/2008 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05416-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/08/2008 Page 5 of 5
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,090
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,568
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,809
<INVENTORY>                                     17,776
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          11,590
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,972
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  46,448
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,642
<OTHER-SE>                                         409
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    46,448
<SALES>                                         85,650
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                85,650
<CGS>                                           68,427
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   68,427
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,112
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,946
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 415
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,405
<INCOME-TAX>                                       433
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                972
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    127
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       845
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F2>
<FN>
<F1>The Company has an unclassified balance sheet due to the nature of its
industry.
<F2>Not presented since the amounts do not differ significantly from the primary
net income per share.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
# C_2009063EN.01001101.xml

| 18.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/11

---

Notice regarding the adaptation in line with inflation of certain amounts laid down in the Reinsurance Directive

(2009/C 63/03)

In accordance with Article 41 of Directive 2005/68/EC (1) on reinsurance and amending Council Directives 73/239/EEC, 92/49/EEC as well as Directives 98/78/EC and 2002/83/EC, the amounts laid down in euro in Article 40(2) were reviewed in 2008 in order to take account of changes in the European index of consumer prices comprising all Member States as published by Eurostat. As a result of the review, the amounts laid down in euro are increased from EUR 3 000 000 to EUR 3 200 000 and from EUR 1 000 000 to EUR 1 100 000. The Commission Services have informed the European Parliament and the Council of the review and the adapted amounts.

1

---

(1)  OJ L 323, 9.12.2005, p. 1.

1

---
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.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### International Trade Administration 

This decision is made pursuant to section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651, 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 A.M. and 5 P.M. in Room 4211, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. 

*Docket Number:*                     01-006.                     *Applicant:*                     University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.                     *Instrument:*                     Photoelectron Emission Microscope, Model PEEM III.                     *Manufacturer:*                     ELMITEC Elektronenmikroskopie, Germany.                     *Intended Use:*                     See notice at 66 FR 18445, March 26, 2001.                

*Comments:*                     None received.                     *Decision:*                     Approved. No instrument of equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such purposes as it is intended to be used, is being manufactured in the United States.                     *Reasons:*                     The foreign instrument provides aberration correction for high transmission and sub 10 nm resolution. The National Institutes of Health advises in its memorandum of March 12, 2001 that (1) this capability is pertinent to the applicant's intended purpose and (2) it knows of no domestic instrument or apparatus of equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument for the applicant's intended use.                 

We know of no other instrument or apparatus of equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument which is being manufactured in the United States. 

Gerald A. Zerdy, 

Program Manager, Statutory Import Programs Staff. 

[FR Doc. 01-11311 Filed 5-3-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
----

| Exhibit      32.1                                 |
|---------------------------------------------------|
|                                              |
| CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO                    |
| 18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,                      |
| AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                       |
| SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002 |

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | (i)      the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended      March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on      the date hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of      section 13(a) or 15(d) of the 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.                                                                                                                                                          |

|             | By:    | /s/      MATTHEW FROST               |   |
|------------------|--------|--------------------------------------|--------|
|             |   | Matthew      Frost                   |   |
|             |   | Interim      Chief Executive Officer |   |
|             |   | On2      Technologies, Inc.          |   |
|             |   |                                 |   |
| May      7, 2009 |   |                                 |   |
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 13-2 Filed 08/23/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 13-2 Filed 08/23/2007 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 32

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of Oakridge Energy, Inc. (the "Company") does hereby
certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

      Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ended February 29, 2004 (the "Form 10-KSB/A") of the Company fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Act and the information
contained in the Form 10-KSB/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the
periods presented in the Form 10-KSB/A.

Date: May 31, 2005                          /s/ Sandra Pautsky
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Sandra Pautsky, President and
                                                Principal Executive Officer
                                                of Oakridge Energy, Inc.

                                            /s/ Carol J. Cooper
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Carol J. Cooper, Principal
                                                 Financial Officer of
                                                 Oakridge Energy, Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 88 (Monday, May 7, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 23083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11367]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 34035]


The Central Illinois Railroad Company-Acquisition and Operation 
Exemption-Rail Lines of Union Pacific Railroad Company and Canadian 
Pacific Rail System at Elk Grove Village, Cook and DuPage Counties, IL

    The Central Illinois Railroad Company (CIRY), a Class III rail 
carrier, has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.41 
to acquire by lease and operate rail lines owned by the Union Pacific 
Railroad Company (UP) and the Canadian Pacific Rail System (CP). CIRY 
describes the track in greater detail as follows: the Centex Industrial 
Park Trackage owned by UP, or jointly by UP and CP, beginning at the 
west edge of York Road, which is the west end of UP's approximately 
800-foot Elk Grove lead track that extends from UP's Milwaukee 
Subdivision, at milepost 7.8, consisting of approximately 25 miles of 
tracks.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On April 25, 2001, a petition to stay the effective date of 
the exemption was filed by Joseph C. Szabo, for and on behalf of 
United Transportation Union-Illinois Legislative Board. The petition 
for stay was denied in The Central Illinois Railroad Company-
Acquisition and Operation Exemption-Rail Lines of Union Pacific 
Railroad Company and Canadian Pacific Rail System at Elk Grove 
Village, Cook and DuPage Counties, IL, STB Finance Docket No. 34035 
(STB served Apr. 27, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The transaction was scheduled to be consummated no earlier than 
April 30, 2001, the effective date of the exemption (7 days after the 
exemption was filed).
    If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, 
the exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to reopen the proceeding to 
revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. 
The filing of a petition to revoke will not automatically stay the 
transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 34035, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, Office of the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K Street, N.W., 
Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, a copy of each pleading must be 
served on Thomas F. McFarland, Jr., Esq., McFarland & Herman, 20 North 
Wacker Drive, Suite 1330, Chicago, IL 60606-2902.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our website at 
www.stb.dot.gov.

    Decided: May 1, 2001.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-11367 Filed 5-4-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
METHFESSEL & WERBEL, ESQS. 

450 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1400 

New York, NY 10123 

(212) 947-1999 

Attorneys for BMS Catastrophe, Inc. 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

IGBALIJA RUGOVAC AND RUGOVAC 

SADIK, 

Plaintiff, 

-AGAINSTBFP ONE LIBERTY PLAZA CO., L.P., 

BFP ONE LIBERTY PLAZA CO., LLC., 

BLACKMON-MOORING-STEAMATIC 

CATASTOPHE, INC.D/B/A BMS CAT, 

et.al. 

Defendants. 

21 MC 102 (AKH) 

INDEX NO.: 07CV1524 

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF ANSWER 

TO MASTER COMPLAINT 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT Defendant, BMS Catastrophe, Inc. s/h/a 

Blackmon-Mooring-Steamatic Catastophe, Inc. d/b/a BMS Catastrophe, by 

their attorneys, Methfessel & Werbel, as and for their response to the 

allegations set forth in the Complaint by Adoption (Check-Off Complaint) 

Related to the Master Complaint filed in the above referenced action, hereby 

adopts their Answer and defenses to the Master Complaint, dated July 26, 

2007, which was filed in the matter of: In Re World Trade Center Lower 

Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

 To the extent that Defendant’s Answer to the Master Complaint does not 

comprehensively address any of the specific allegations within the Check-Off 

Complaint in the above captioned matter, Defendant, Defendant, BMS 

Catastrophe, Inc., denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as 

to the truth of such specific allegations. 

Case 1:07-cv-01524-AKH Document 10 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 1 of 3
 WHEREFORE, the defendant, Defendant, BMS Catastrophe, Inc., 

demands judgment dismissing the above captioned action as against them, 

together with costs, disbursements and such other and further relief as this 

Court deems just and proper. 

DATED: New York, New York 

 September 21, 2007 

METHFESSEL & WERBEL, ESQS. 

Attorneys for BMS Catastrophe 

 

By:________________________________ 

Frank J. Keenan (FK 8922) 

450 Seventh Avenue 

Suite 1400 

New York, New York 10123 

(212) 947-1999 

Case 1:07-cv-01524-AKH Document 10 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies as follows: 

 l. I am employed by the law firm of Methfessel & Werbel. 

 2. On September 21, 2007 the undersigned prepared and 

forwarded copies of the within Notice of Adoption , via ECF, to the 

following parties: 

 Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern, LLP 

5 Broadway, 12th Floor 

New York, NY 10006 

Attorneys for: Plaintiff 

All Defense Counsel 

 3. I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am 

aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are wilfully false, I am 

subject to punishment. 

____________________________________ 

Frank J. Keenan 

Case 1:07-cv-01524-AKH Document 10 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 3 of 3
GEHALD c'. WAWN A~J- aa. TEgas .~ 

m2?,.. 19~9 s. 

‘3. 

Hon. Carl Per&, ~County Attorney 

Hall county 

Memphis, Texas 

Dea+. Sir: 1’. 

; 

opinion RO. 4-j-i-g ' " 

:. : Re: Duty o? "pl.$y to cafis work+?n's 

. 

,C~pa$f* +mmsice on its em-, 

.,, 

pxyey3t;;] '; : ',I,): ". 

Your requ& for e.n opFnion upon the following questioq: 

Ye it the duty of the county or of ‘the rosa preclncts’to’ 

carry employers liability insurance for the protection of road 

worlollen arid the county”? 

has been received by this department. 

Tex. Jur., Vol. 45,, p. 455, Sec. 69 - Worhmen’s Compensat$on - States, 

Count&es and Ci$ieSj reads a8 follows: W’. .’ 

“The c&upensatLon law was obviously Intended to apply to’lnduetrlal employment. It does not apply to states, countGee or 

cities in their performance of governmental funct&x!s . ‘. . By a 

constitutional amendment adopted Sowember 3; 1936, (Art. 3, Sec. 

59) the legislature ls’glven power to pans ‘m&h laws as may be 

necessary to provide for Workmen’s Compensation Insurance for 

such state employees, as in Its judgment is necessary ‘or required; 

aud to provide for the payment of all costs, charges, and premiums 

on such policies of Insurance; providing the atate,, @all never,, be’ 

required to purchase insurance for any employee; f” ‘~ ” ~. 

Article 3, Section 59, Constitution of Texas, reads as follows: 

“The Legislature ~&all have power, to pas8 euch laws a8 may be 

necessary to provide for Workmen’8 Compensation Insurance for such 

Btate employees, as in Its judgment Is necessary or required; and 

to provide for the payment of all costs, charges and premiums on, 

such policies of ineurance;,prov$ding that the state shall never 

be required to purchase insurance for any employee.” 

. 
Eon. Carl Periman, Way 24, 1939, Pme 2 (O-779) 

Pursuant to the constitutio~l authority of Article 3, Section 59, 

Texan Conntitdion, the Legislature on June ll, 1937, paeqed Article 66748, 

which provide6 for Workmen'8 Compeneatian ~amsnce for employeea ofthe 

Texae State Highway Department. Under thle act the Highway Department Is 

aelf-insuring and carries Its own insurance as net out in the' Statute. The 

Iegis&ature haa not extended the benefits of Wor@ea's CompenSatiou limurance 

to any other bodies or departmenta of the state government than the Texas State 

Highway Department. 

The county and its political subdivlslone are protected by their 

sovereignty. The law does not require the Conml+oners' Court to take out 

insurance. 

You gre, therefore,'~~epectf&lly advised that it 1s the opinion of 

this department t-t it is not$$he duty of the county 9r op the road precinct 

to carry employer'8 liabllitg insurance for the pro$ectlon of road workmen 

or the county. 

Trustlng,that,thls auyra ~om,,inqu@y, we are 

Very, SW-y yours 

WJF:onib:llu 

APPROVF8D: 

/a/ Qeraid.$'. Mann' 

ATTORlEi - OFTEXAS, 

ATroRwEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

By Is/ Wm. J. Fatn$ng 

Wm. J. Fanqing 

" Asslstimt 

APPROVED 

OPIWION 

doMMmEE 

BY 

CHAIRMAN
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 28-4 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 28-4 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 5 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 6 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 7 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 8 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 9 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 10 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 11 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 12 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 13 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 14 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 15 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 16 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 17 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 18 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 19 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 20 of 21
Case 1:07-cv-05311-AKH Document 25-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 21 of 21
# C_2009166EN.01001501.xml

| 18.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 166/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 166/15

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 22 February 2008 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/A.37.792 — Microsoft (2)

Rapporteur: Spain

2009/C 166/06

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the definitive amount of the periodic penalty payment to be imposed on Microsoft for failure to comply with its obligation to make Interoperability Information available to interested undertakings on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, pursuant to Article 5(a) of Commission Decision 2007/53/EC of 24 March 2004. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the definitive amount of the periodic penalty payment to be imposed on Microsoft for failure to comply with its obligation to make Interoperability Information available to interested undertakings on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, pursuant to Article 5(a) of Commission Decision 2007/53/EC of 24 March 2004.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of it's Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of it's Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

---