alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
TIM OTHY JOSEPH M C ILW AIN,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lla

nt,
v. JAM ES NATHANIEL B R OW N, AKA Jim B rown, De fe nda

nt-Appe l le e . No. 20-55424 D.C . No. 2:18-c v-05275-DM G-SK
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia Dolly M
. Ge e , Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d August 4, 2021 ** San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : THOM AS, C hie f Judge , a nd HAW K INS and M c KEOW N, C irc u it Judge s. Tim othy M c Ilwa in, a

n attorne y , a

ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismissing his dive rsity a c tion a ga inst Ja

m e s B rown. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C
. § 1291, a nd we a ffirm
. 

# FIL ED AUG 6 2021 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

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

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

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

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

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).M c Ilwa in doe s not c ha lle nge
— an d ha s the re fore wa i ve d re vie w of— the distric t c o urt’ s dismissa l of his la wsuit on the

inde pe nde nt, a lte rnat ive ground tha t he fa ile d to tim e l y

oppose dism issa l in viola tion of theC e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia ’ s loc a l rule s. Se e Padge tt v . W right , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th C ir. 2009) (de c lining to c onside r m atte rs “ n ot spe c ific a lly and distinc tly ra ise d” in a n ope ning brie f (c ita

tion omitte d )); se ealso C
. D. C a l. R . 7-9 (se tting forth de a dline for opposition pa

pe rs), 7-12 (providing tha t fa ilure to tim e ly

oppose m otion is ground for gra

nting m o tion); G hazali v . Moran , 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th C ir. 1995) (“ Fa ilure to follow a

distric t c ourt’ s loc a l rule s is a prope r ground for dismissa l.” ). W e like wise de c line to re vie w the distric t c ourt’ s de nia l of le a ve to a m e nd be c a use M c Ilwa in’ s brie fing on a ppe a l la c ks a

ny argum e nt on tha

t issue
. S e eN e v . De p’t of C orr. v . Gre e ne , 648 F.3d 1014, 1020 (9th C ir. 2011) (c onc luding tha t a pro se a ppe lla nt wa i ve d issue s not supporte d by argum e nt in ope ning brie f). AFFIRM E D.

2
Mario Alberto LOPEZ GARCIA, petitioner, v. CITIGROUP INC.

No. 17-1388.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 11, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
W.A. GRIFFIN, petitioner, v. COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES, INC.

No. 17-103.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 14 (Monday, January 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6598-6599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1580]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER01-691-000]


Duke Energy Hinds, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

    Duke Energy Hinds, LLC (Duke Hinds) submitted for filing a rate 
schedule under which Duke Hinds will engage in wholesale electric power 
and energy transactions at market-based rates. Duke Hinds also 
requested waiver of various Commission regulations. In particular, Duke 
Hinds requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR 
Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability by Duke Hinds.
    On January 9, 2001, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, 
Division of Corporate Applications, Office of Markets, Tariffs and 
Rates, granted requests for blanket approval under Part 34, subject to 
the following:
    Within thirty days of the date of the order, any person desiring to 
be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of securities 
or assumptions of liability by Duke Hinds should file a motion to 
intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 
and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.211 and 385.214).
    Absent a request for hearing within this period, Duke Hinds is 
authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as 
a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security 
or another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for 
some lawful object within the corporate purposes of the applicant, and 
compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or 
appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of Duke Hinds's issuances of securities or 
assumptions of liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protests, as set forth above, is February 8, 2001.
    Copies of the full text of the Order are available from the 
Commission's Public Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Internet at 
http:/

[[Page 6599]]

/www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims. (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boerger,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-1580 Filed 1-19-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> CANADIAN
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   0.70
<CASH>                                         535,359
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  103,253
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,025,741
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,410,728
<PP&E>                                       4,451,211
<DEPRECIATION>                                 544,941
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,706,105
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,229,886
<BONDS>                                      9,306,398<F1>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     9,302,678
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,400,000<F2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,706,105
<SALES>                                      6,337,332
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,337,332
<CGS>                                        4,072,820
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,072,820
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            11,813,217
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             760,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (10,308,705)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (10,308,705)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (10,308,705)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  ($1.64)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  ($1.64)
<FN>
<F1>Of this amount, $5 million is convertible debenture (face amount $6.0 million)
which will be converted into common stock effective 31 January 1998, subject to
shareholder approval.
<F2>Amount of equity value arizing from convertible feature of L-T Debt.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Ronnie Edward DUKE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7347.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Richard STORER, et al., petitioners, v. Jeremy CLARK, et al.

No. 17-1248.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 23, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
# L_2005239EN.01004001.xml

| 15.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 239/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 239/40

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 60/2005

of 29 April 2005

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 32/2005 of 11 March 2005 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 32/2005 of 11 March 2005 (1).

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1875/2004 of 28 October 2004 amending Annexes II and III to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin as regards sodium salicylate and fenvalerate (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1875/2004 of 28 October 2004 amending Annexes II and III to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin as regards sodium salicylate and fenvalerate (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 14 (Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90) of Chapter XIII of Annex II to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32004 R 1875: Commission Regulation (EC) No 1875/2004 of 28 October 2004 (OJ L 326 29.10.2004, p. 19).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32004 R 1875: Commission Regulation (EC) No 1875/2004 of 28 October 2004 (OJ L 326 29.10.2004, p. 19).’

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EC) No 1875/2004 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 30 April 2005, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 29 April 2005.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Richard WRIGHT

---

(1)  
  OJ L 198, 28.7.2005, p. 22.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 326 29.10.2004, p. 19.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
# C_2006105EN.01001101.xml

| 4.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 105/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 105/11

---

Conclusion of Memorandum of Understanding with the Republic of Croatia on its participation in the Community incentive measures in the field of employment

(2006/C 105/06)

On 3 March 2006 the Memorandum of Understanding between the European Commission, on behalf of the European Community, and the Government of the Republic of Croatia on its participation in the Community incentive measures in the field of employment was signed.

The full text in English of the Memorandum of Understanding can be found on the following web page: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/croatia/index.htm

http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/croatia/index.htm

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           7,993
<SECURITIES>                                    17,292
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,382
<ALLOWANCES>                                       313
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,515
<PP&E>                                          15,121
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,929
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  44,111
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,070
<BONDS>                                            222
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        93,085
<OTHER-SE>                                    (58,526)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    44,111
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,973
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,229
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                44,041
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,174
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (2,039)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (39,258)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (39,258)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (39,258)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (1.82)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.82)


</TABLE>
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3945 

Making supplemental appropriations for the Army Corps of Engineers for 

flood control projects and storm damage reduction projects in areas 

affected by flooding in the city of Jacksonville, Florida, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 24, 2019 

Mr. LAWSON of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Appropriations, and in addition to the Committee on 

the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 

in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

Making supplemental appropriations for the Army Corps of 

Engineers for flood control projects and storm damage 

reduction projects in areas affected by flooding in the 

city of Jacksonville, Florida, and for other purposes. 

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

3 That the following sums are appropriated, out of any 

4 money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the 

5 fiscal year ending September 30, 2019: 


Pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3945 IH

1 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

2 CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

3 CONSTRUCTION

4 For an additional amount for ‘‘Construction’’ for 

5 flood control projects and storm damage reduction 

6 projects in areas affected by flooding in the city of Jack7 sonville, Florida, that have received a major disaster dec8 laration pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Re9 lief and Emergency Assistance Act, $116,968,000, to re10 main available through fiscal year 2028: Provided, That 

11 upon approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the 

12 House of Representatives and the Senate these funds may 

13 be used to construct any project by the Corps for reducing 

14 flooding and storm damage risks in the city of Jackson15 ville, Florida, that the Secretary determines is technically 

16 feasible, economically justified, and environmentally ac17 ceptable: Provided further, That projects using these funds 

18 shall be at full Federal expense with respect to such funds: 

19 Provided further, That such amount is designated by the 

20 Congress as being for disaster relief pursuant to section 

21 251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 

22 Deficit Control Act of 1985. 

23 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Flood Water Relief 

24 Act of 2019’’. 

Æ 


Pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
David Lyman SPALDING, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8167.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 23, 2018.

Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
In Re Vincent W. ALDRIDGE, et ux., petitioners.

No. 17-7830.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
Marijan CVJETICANIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7203.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 26, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Garrett GRIFFIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 15-9572.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
<PAGE>
                                 AMENDMENT TO
                            EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                                           
                                           
    THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT ("Amendment"), is made and entered
into effective this 1st day of June, 1997, by and between ALAN C. MALTZ
("Employee") and BRITE VOICE SYSTEMS, INC., a Kansas corporation ("Brite").

    WHEREAS, Brite and Employee entered into an Employment Agreement dated
August 9, 1995 ("Agreement"), and,

    WHEREAS, Brite and Employee desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in
this Amendment.
    
    NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, covenants and conditions
contained herein, the parties agree as follows:

    1.   All terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect, unless expressly changed by this Amendment.

    2.   All definitions contained in the Agreement shall be incorporated into
and have the same meanings in this Amendment. 

    3.   Section 1 of the Agreement shall be modified to provide that Employee
shall devote at least 20 hours per week to the business and affairs of Brite.

    4.   The salary amount set forth in Section 2.1 as Employee's Base Pay
shall be modified so that, as of June 1, 1997, Employee's Base Pay is an annual
rate of $107,625.

    5.   Any incentive compensation owed under Section 2.2 of the Agreement
shall be paid at the rate of fifty percent (50%) of the amount of incentive
compensation that would have been payable under the Agreement.

<PAGE>
 
    6.   Section 2.4 of the Agreement is amended to provide that Employee's car
allowance shall be paid at the rate of fifty percent (50%) of the amount that
would have been payable under the Agreement.


    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date
first set forth above.


                               BRITE VOICE SYSTEMS, INC.



                               By      /s/ David S. Gergacz
                                 ---------------------------------
                                  David S. Gergacz
                                  President


                                       /s/ Alan C. Maltz
                                 ---------------------------------
                                  ALAN C. MALTZ
Marvin SONGLIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7358.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

*1027Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
IIB 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4034 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2020 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 602 Pacific Avenue in Bremerton, Washington, as the ‘‘John Henry Turpin Post Office Building’’. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4034 RFS

1 SECTION 1. JOHN HENRY TURPIN POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 602 Pacific Avenue in Brem4 erton, Washington, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘John Henry Turpin Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘John Henry Turpin 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 14, 

2020. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Certification of Chief Executive Officer, Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Borland Software Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Dale L. Fuller, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

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

(2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the Report and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Report.

|/s/  DALE L. FULLER    
|-----------------------
|                       
|Dale L. Fuller         
|Chief Executive Officer
|November 9, 2004       



This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Yancy D. COOK, petitioner, v. Steven R. BAYLE, et al.

No. 17-8015.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
VOTER VERIFIED, INC., petitioner, v. ELECTION SYSTEM & SOFTWARE LLC.

No. 16-1505.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
#### NATIONAL EXCHANGE CLUB, Inc., Appellant, v. Frazier REAMS, Collector of Internal Revenue for Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and United States of America, Appellees.

No. 9891.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Feb. 19, 1945.

Fraser, Shumaker, Kendrick & Winn and Amos L. Conn, all of Toledo, Ohio, for appellant.

Don C. Miller, of Cleveland, Ohio, Marcus L. Friedman, of Toledo, Ohio, and Samuel O. Clark, Jr., of Washington, D. C, for appellees.

Before SIMONS, MARTIN, and MCALLISTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The above cause coming on to be heard on briefs, transcript of record, and argument of counsel for the parties; after due consideration, it is hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of the district court be and is hereby affirmed.
Michael RESENDEZ, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 17-7159.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District denied.