alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

OTHEANER DEON MURPHY §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23cv311

WARDEN, MARK W. STILES UNIT §

MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE

JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Otheaner Deon Murphy, an inmate at the Goree Unit, proceeding pro se, brought

this civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate

Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. 

The magistrate judge recommends dismissing this action with prejudice as frivolous and for

failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 

The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States

Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such referral, along with the record, pleadings and all available

evidence. A copy of the report and recommendation was mailed to plaintiff at the address

provided to the court. Plaintiff acknowledged receipt of the report and recommendation on

November 28, 2023. No objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States

Magistrate Judge have been filed.

Case 1:23-cv-00311-MJT-ZJH Document 11 Filed 01/05/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 27
O R D E R

Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are

correct and the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED. Additionally,

it is 

ORDERED that, to the extent plaintiff’s complaint may be interpreted as asserting state

law claims, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction in this action pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). A separate final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with

the magistrate judge’s recommendations.

2

____________________________

Michael J. Truncale

United States District Judge SIGNED this 5th day of January, 2024.

Case 1:23-cv-00311-MJT-ZJH Document 11 Filed 01/05/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 28
Luke Waine CAINES, Jr., petitioner, v. Josie GASTELO, Warden.

No. 17-8780.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
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.                  

###### Office of Management and Budget

# AGENCY:

Office of Management and Budget.

# ACTION:

Revisions to Appendix C of OMB Circular A-94.

# SUMMARY:

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) revised Circular A-94 in 1992. With that action, OMB specified certain discount rates to be updated annually when the interest rate and inflation assumptions used to prepare the Budget of the United States Government were changed. These updated discount rates are found in Appendix C of the revised Circular and are to be used for cost-effectiveness analysis, including lease-purchase analysis, as specified in the revised Circular. These rates do not apply to regulatory analysis.

                        The revised Circular can be accessed at                         *https://www.whitehouse.gov/​wp-content/​uploads/​2022/​05/​Appendix-C.pdf.*

# DATES:

The revised discount rates will be in effect through December 2022.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rachel Hernández, Office of Economic Policy, Office of Management and Budget, (202) 395-3585.

Danny Yagan,

Associate Director for Economic Policy, Office of Management and Budget.

[FR Doc. 2022-11085 Filed 5-23-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3110-01-P
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT JESUS M ANUEL GUTIER REZ-NEYOY, AKA Je sus M anue l Guitie rre z -Ne y oy , Pe titione r, v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 13-72979 Age n c y No. A205-578-246 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d July

26, 2016 ** B e fore : SC HR O EDER , C ANB Y, a n d C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s. Je sus M a n ue l Gutie rre z -Ne y oy , a

native an d c itiz e n of M e xic o, pe titions for re vie w of the B oa

rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s de c ision pre te rm itting his a pplic at ions for 

# FIL ED

AUG 02 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, 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 9th C ir. R . 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 ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).c anc e lla

tion of re m ova l a

nd volunta

ry de pa rture . W e have jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re v ie w de n ovo que stions of la w , Le a l v . Holde r , 771 F.3d 1140, 1144 (9th C ir. 2014), a n d de ny the pe t ition for re vie w. Gutie rre z -Ne y oy ’ s c onte ntion tha t his c o nvic tion for fe lony e nda n ge rm e nt unde r Ariz ona

R e vise d Statute s § 13-1201(A) is not c ate goric a l ly a c rim e involving mora l turpitude is fore c lose d by our de c ision in Le al v . Holde r . Id. at 1146 (fe lony

e nda nge rm e nt in Ariz ona

is a c rim e involving m

ora l turpitude ). Ac c ordingly , the B IA did not e rr in de te rm ining tha t Gutie rre z -Ne y oy

is sta tutorily ine l igible for c an c e lla

tion of re m ova l a

nd volunta

ry de pa rture . S e e 8 U.S.C . §§ 1101(f)(3), 1229b(b)(1)(B ), 1229c (b)(1)(B ). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

1 3 - 7 2 9 7 9 2
Consulting Agreement



 Exhibit 10.3 
 April 22, 2012 
 Mr. Joseph O. Bunting III 

c/o Colfax Corporation 
 8170 Maple
Lawn Boulevard, Suite 180 
 Fulton, MD 20759 
 Dear Joe: 
 With this letter, we are pleased to confirm the terms of your continued service to
Colfax Corporation (the “Company”) as a consultant to the Board of Directors (the “Board”). 
 You have
agreed to accept the Board’s offer to serve as a strategic advisor (“Strategic Advisor”) to the Board and to the executive management team of the Company. Your duties as Strategic Advisor will include providing insight and perspective
concerning business strategy and policies, attending Board meetings as an observer as requested by the Board chair, and other services as requested by the Board chair. 
 In your role as Strategic Advisor, you will be paid a quarterly fee of $5,000, as soon as reasonably practicable following the close of the quarter/month. 

You and the Board agree that your role as Strategic Advisor is an “at-will” relationship. This relationship is terminable for
any reason or no reason and at any time by the Board. 
 You and the Board agree that you will perform your duties under this
letter agreement as an independent contractor of the Company. You will not be eligible for any benefits that the Company provides to its employees, including but not limited to group insurance coverage and other employee benefit plan coverages. You
agree that any payments made under this letter agreement shall constitute consulting fees and that you will be responsible for all taxes incurred in connection with the performance of services under this letter agreement. 

You will be reimbursed for reasonable and necessary expenses incurred in the fulfillment of your duties in accordance with the
Company’s generally applicable policies. 
 The Company shall indemnify you as permitted by law and its by-laws for
reasonable costs and fees that you may incur in the discharge of your duties hereunder. 
 This letter agreement supersedes any
other written or oral agreement relating to the matters addressed herein. 
 We value your contributions to the Company as a prior member of our
Board and believe that further collaboration efforts will assist us with our growth objectives and the integration of our businesses. The Board and management look forward to your continued partnership with us. 








	
	Sincerely,
	
	 /s/ Mitchell P. Rales

	Mitchell P. Rales
	Chairman of the Board
	
	Agreed and acknowledged:
	
	 /s/ Joseph O. Bunting III

	Joseph O. Bunting III
Clarence D. LEWIS, petitioner, v. Johnny HEDGEMON, et al.

No. 18-5413.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please see

Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please

also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other

deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the

filing date. 

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

2 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE

3 OF ELI ORLOWSKY, Deceased,

4 WILCOX LAW FIRM, P.C.,

5 Claimant-Appellant,

6 v. NO. 31,870

7 ESTATE OF ELI ORLOWSKY,

8 DOUGLAS ORLOWSKY, PERSONAL

9 REPRESENTATIVE,

10 Defendant-Appellee.

11 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY

12 Carl J. Butkus, District Judge

13 Wilcox Law Firm, P.C.

14 Vickie R. Wilcox

15 James A. Noel

16 Albuquerque, NM 

17 for Appellant

18 Karl H. Roepke

19 Albuquerque, NM

20 for Appellee

21 MEMORANDUM OPINION
2

1 VIGIL, Judge.

2 Summary affirmance was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of

3 proposed summary disposition filed on March 13, 2012. Claimant filed a

4 memorandum in opposition to proposed summary disposition on April 2, 2012.

5 Summary affirmance was proposed again for the reasons stated in the second notice

6 of proposed summary disposition filed on May 9, 2012. No memorandum opposing

7 summary affirmance has been filed and the time for doing so has expired.

8 AFFIRMED.

9 IT IS SO ORDERED.

10 _______________________________

11 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge

12 WE CONCUR:

13 _________________________________

14 RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge

15 _________________________________

16 TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge
The HONORABLE MICHAEL J. DAVIS, United States District Judge for the *

District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-3158

___________

Susan Phillips, *

*

Plaintiff - Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Metropolitan Zoological Park & * Eastern District of Missouri.

Museum District, doing business as *

the St. Louis Zoo, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Defendant - Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: February 13, 1998

Filed: April 8, 1998

___________

Before LOKEN and HANSEN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, District Judge. *

___________

PER CURIAM.

Susan Phillips was terminated from her employment at the St. Louis Zoo in May

1994. She sued the Metropolitan Zoological Park & Museum District in state court in

September 1994, asserting claims of breach of contract and intentional infliction of

emotional distress because the District refused to reinstate her to a prior position. The
The HONORABLE CAROL E. JACKSON, United States District Judge for the 1

Eastern District of Missouri.

-2-

state court dismissed her first amended petition with prejudice in February 1996,

granting Phillips twenty days to amend. Instead, Phillips commenced this action in

April 1996, alleging sex and race discrimination in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C.

§ 1981, and the Missouri Human Rights Act because Phillips, a white female, was

replaced by a less qualified African-American male. The district court dismissed the 1

action as barred by the doctrine of res judicata as developed under Missouri law.

Phillips appeals. After careful review of the record and consideration of the parties’

contentions on appeal, we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s

Memorandum and Order dated June 20, 1997. See 8th Cir. Rule 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
**EXHIBIT 31.01**

 

**RULE13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Robert M. Alderman, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of ML Principal ProtectionL.P.;

 

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

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

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

 

*a) Designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;*

* *

*b) Evaluated the effectiveness ofthe registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and*

* *

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

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

 

a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date: March 31, 2006

 
| By                                             | /s/ ROBERT M. ALDERMAN |   |
|------------------------------------------------|------------------------|--------|
| Robert M. Alderman                             |
| Chief Executive Officer, President and Manager |
| **(Principal Executive Officer)**              |

 

----
George E. KERSEY, petitioner, v. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA.

No. 17-8870.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL LOS ANGELES, et al., petitioners, v. N.L., a Minor, By and Through his Guardian ad Litem, Jacqueline ARCE.

No. 17-1633.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Motion of California Hospital Association, et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         299,467
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,050,055
<ALLOWANCES>                                   144,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,359,019
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,971,579
<PP&E>                                       5,885,832
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,022,313
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,454,452
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,082,528
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,722
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,923,142
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,454,452
<SALES>                                      7,188,777
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,188,777
<CGS>                                        4,500,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,500,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,392,919
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 9,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             200,409
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 86,449
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             86,449
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    86,449
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 5

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:

7137
Reel/frame

041248/0681

Execution date

Dec 29, 2016

Date recorded

Jan 4, 2017

Properties

56

Pages

6

Conveyance

MERGER AND CHANGE OF NAME (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS).

Assignors

HEADWATER PARTNERS I LLC

HEADWATER MANAGEMENT LLC

Correspondent

ANN TAYLOR

1011 PRUITT PLACE

TYLER, TX 75703

Assignee

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

1011 PRUITT PLACE

TYLER, TEXAS 75703

Reel/frame

028149/0075

Execution date

Mar 24, 2009

Date recorded

May 3, 2012

Properties

1

Pages

2

Conveyance

ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS).

Assignors

RALEIGH, GREGORY G.

Correspondent

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

379 LYTTON AVENUE

PALO ALTO, CA 94301

Assignee

HEADWATER PARTNERS I, LLC

2995 WOODSIDE ROAD

STE. 400

WOODSIDE, CALIFORNIA 94062-2048

Assignment abstract of title for Application 13461141

Invention

title/Inventor

AUTOMATED

DEVICE

PROVISIONING

AND

ACTIVATION

Gregory G.

Raleigh

Patent

8406733

Mar 26, 2013

Publication

20120214441

Aug 23, 2012

Application

13461141

May 1, 2012

PCT International

registration

Assignments (2 total)

Assignment 2

Assignment 1

10/23/24, 10:22 PM United States Patent and Trademark Office

https://assignment.uspto.gov/patent/index.html#/patent/search/resultAbstract?id=8406733&type=patNum 1/2

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 2 of 11 PageID #:

7138
10/23/24, 10:22 PM United States Patent and Trademark Office

https://assignment.uspto.gov/patent/index.html#/patent/search/resultAbstract?id=8406733&type=patNum 2/2

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 3 of 11 PageID #:

7139
Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 4 of 11 PageID #:

7140
Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 5 of 11 PageID #:

7141
Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 6 of 11 PageID #:

7142
Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 7 of 11 PageID #:

7143
Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 8 of 11 PageID #:

7144
Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 9 of 11 PageID #:

7145
Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 10 of 11 PageID #:

7146
Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 175-5 Filed 10/25/24 Page 11 of 11 PageID #:

7147
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION 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 Trimeris, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2005
as filed with Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven D. Skolsky, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



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



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ STEVEN D. SKOLSKY  
|Steven D. Skolsky      
|Chief Executive Officer



November 8, 2005



The foregoing certification is
being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.



A signed original of this written statement required by § 906 has been provided to Trimeris, Inc. and will be retained by Trimeris, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk April 25, 2011

h0418 

# Order

April 25, 2011

142093

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142093 COA: 299628 Wayne CC: 05-001492 ERNEST GRAY JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 28, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is considered , and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
William GAVIDIA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6948.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Allan Latoi STORY, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 18-5446.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.