alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23

- 1072

DENNIS SHIPMAN , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. SOMERSET COUNTY (MD); SOMERSET COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES (MD); KIRK SIMPKINS; W. NEWTON JACKSON, MD Circuit Court Judge, individually and in his official capacity , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. George L. Russell , III , District Judge. ( 1:22

- cv - 03111

- GL R )

Submitted : September 5, 2023 Decided: October 6, 2023

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed as modified by un published per curiam opinion

. Judge Gregory dissents.

Dennis Shipman, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1072 Doc: 8 Filed: 10/06/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Dennis Shipman appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint and request for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order for failure to comply
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), 65(b). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order , but we modify the judgment to reflect that the dismissal is without prejudice

. * Shipman v. Somerset Cnty. (MD) , No. 1: 22

- cv 03111

- GLR (D. Md. Jan. 10, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED

* Judge Gregory voted to vacate the district court’s order and remand with instructions to allow Shipman an opportunity to amend his complaint. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1072 Doc: 8 Filed: 10/06/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3679 

To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to prohibition 

on payment of bonuses and pay increases for executives of a State 

Exchange funded through Federal grants, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 9, 2013 

Mr. GARDNER (for himself and Mr. COFFMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

to prohibition on payment of bonuses and pay increases 

for executives of a State Exchange funded through Federal grants, 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 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON PAYMENT OF BONUSES AND 

4 PAY INCREASES FOR EXCHANGE EXECU5 TIVES. 

6 Section 1311(a) of the Patient Protection and Af7 fordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18031(a)) is amended by 

8 adding at the end the following new paragraph: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3679 IH

1 ‘‘(6) PROHIBITION ON PAYMENT OF BONUSES

2 AND PAY INCREASES FOR EXCHANGE EXECU3 TIVES.—The Secretary shall provide that no funds 

4 under a grant under this section may be used for a 

5 bonus or pay increase (beyond the level of compensa6 tion in effect as of October 1, 2013) for a chief exec7 utive officer, chief information officer, chief oper8 ating officer, or similar executive with respect to the 

9 operation of an Exchange on or after October 1, 

10 2013.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Connie CHANDLER, Employee, by her Guardian Ad Litem, Celeste M. Harris v. ATLANTIC SCRAP & PROCESSING, Employer and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Carrier.

No. 35PA12-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 18, 2016.

Daniel S. Walden, Winston-Salem, for Chandler, Connie.

M. Duane Jones, Charlotte, for Atlantic Scrap and Processing, et al.

Hatcher B. Kincheloe, Charlotte, for Atlantic Scrap and Processing, et al.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendants on the 5th of January 2016 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of April 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 5th of January 2016 by Defendants in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of April 2016."
Exhibit 31.1
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Tamer Husseini, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A, Amendment No. 1,Celeritek, Inc;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, includingits consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as ofthe end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and
     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in thecase of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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 theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and
     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.     Date: July 23, 2004          By: /s/ TAMER HUSSEINI     Name: Tamer Husseini     Title: Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 10-Q FOR THE
PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           8,915                       0
<SECURITIES>                                    48,226                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,850                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,145                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                76,859                       0
<PP&E>                                          15,765                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,891                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  87,188                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,785                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            14                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                      65,389                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    87,188                       9
<SALES>                                         14,215                  37,284
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,669                  52,016
<CGS>                                              678                   1,475
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,844                  10,042
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,218                  36,478
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   448                     302
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   4                      36
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,071                   6,957
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,044                   2,366
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,027                   4,591
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,027                   4,591
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14                     .31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14                     .31
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3717 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3717

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow reimbursement from 
        flexible spending accounts for certain dental products.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 20, 2008

  Ms. Stabenow (for herself and Mr. Cornyn) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow reimbursement from 
        flexible spending accounts for certain dental products.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Dental Health Promotion Act of 
2008''.

SEC. 2. REIMBURSEMENT FROM FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNTS FOR CERTAIN 
              DENTAL PRODUCTS.

    (a) In General.--Section 106 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to contributions by employer to accident and health plans) is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(f) Dental Care Products Under Flexible Spending Arrangement.--An 
arrangement shall not fail to be treated as a health flexible spending 
arrangement under this section or section 105 merely because such 
arrangement provides reimbursement for products used to diagnose, cure, 
mitigate, treat, or prevent the onset of tooth decay (caries), 
periodontal diseases, and conditions ailing the teeth, gums, and mouth, 
or affecting the proper function thereof, for which reimbursement 
without regard to this subsection would not otherwise be allowable.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to plan years beginning after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Erno Goldberger, et al., Appellants, v Benjamin Eisner et al., Respondents.

[799 NYS2d 778]

In an action, inter alia, to enjoin the defendants from enforcing a judgment, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.), dated June 24, 2004, as granted the defendants’ motion to disqualify the plaintiffs’ counsel.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the defendants’ motion to disqualify the plaintiffs’ counsel pursuant to Code of Professional Responsibility DR 5-102 (d) (22 NYCRR 1200.21 [d]). To obtain disqualification of counsel pursuant to that provision, the party moving for disqualification must demonstrate that (1) the testimony of the opposing party’s counsel is necessary to their case, and (2) that such testimony is or may be prejudicial to the client *(see S & S Hotel Ventures Ltd. Partnership v*777 *S. H. Corp.,*69 NY2d 437, 446 [1987]; *Daniel Gale Assoc., Inc. v George,*8 AD3d 608, 609 [2004]).

In the instant case, the defendants failed to demonstrate either that the testimony of the plaintiffs’ counsel was necessary or that it would prejudice the plaintiffs’ case. The defendants submitted only speculation in support of their motion, which was insufficient to establish that the attorney’s testimony would be prejudicial to his or her client *(see Frias v Frias,*155 AD2d 585 [1989]). H. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ., concur.
# C_2008223EN.01000702.xml

| 30.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 10 July 2008 — Bertelsmann AG, Sony Corporation of America v Commission of the European Communities Independent Music Publishers and Labels Association (Impala, an international association), Sony BMG Music Entertainment BV

(Case C-413/06 P) (1)

1

(Appeals - Competition - Control of concentrations between undertakings - Sony BMG joint venture - Appeal against the annulment of a Commission decision declaring a concentration compatible with the common market - Judicial review - Scope - Standard of proof - Role of the statement of objections - Strengthening or creation of a collective dominant position - Statement of reasons for a decision approving a concentration - Use of confidential information)

(2008/C 223/10)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Bertelsmann AG (represented by: P. Chappatte and J. Boyce, Solicitors), Sony Corporation of America (represented by: N. Levy, Barrister, R. Snelders, avocat, and T. Graf, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellants:

Other parties to the proceedings: Independent Music Publishers and Labels Association (Impala) (represented by: S. Crosby and J. Golding, Solicitors, and by I. Wekstein, Advocate), Commission of the European Communities (represented by: A. Whelan, Agent and K. Mojzesowicz, Agent), Sony BMG Music Entertainment BV, (represented by: N. Levy, Barrister, R. Snelders, avocat, and T. Graf, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 13 July 2006 in Case T-464/04 Impala v Commission by which that Court annulled the Commission's Decision of 19 July 2004 declaring a concentration that creates a joint venture combining the activities of Sony and Bertelsmann in the recorded music sector to be compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/M.3333 — Sony/BMG)

Impala

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 13 July 2006 in Case T-464/04 Impala v Commission; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 13 July 2006 in Case T-464/04 Impala v Commission;

Impala

Commission

| 2. | Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities;

| 3. | Reserves the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Reserves the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.

1

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Farley L. BERNARD.

No. 282P08-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 4th of September 2015 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Wake County, the following order was entered and is <page vol="778" reporter="S.E.2d" no="277" /> hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

> "Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of November 2015."
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    In accordance with § 271.25 of its rules regarding availability of information (12 CFR part 271), there is set forth below the domestic policy directive issued by the Federal Open Market Committee at its meeting held on August 9, 2005.[1] 

                    The Federal Open Market Committee seeks monetary and financial conditions that will foster price stability and promote sustainable growth in output. To further its long-run objectives, the Committee in the immediate future seeks conditions in reserve markets consistent with increasing the federal funds rate to an average of around 3                    1/2                     percent.                

The vote encompassed approval of the paragraph below for inclusion in the statement to be released shortly after the meeting:

“The Committee perceives that, with appropriate monetary policy action, the upside and downside risks to the attainment of both sustainable growth and price stability should be kept roughly equal. With underlying inflation expected to be contained, the Committee believes that policy accommodation can be removed at a pace that is likely to be measured. Nonetheless, the Committee will respond to changes in economic prospects as needed to fulfill its obligation to maintain price stability.”

By order of the Federal Open Market Committee, September 6, 2005.

Vincent R. Reinhart,

Secretary, Federal Open Market Committee.

# Footnotes

1.                             Copies of the Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee Meeting on August 9, 2005, which includes the domestic policy directive issued at the meeting, are available upon request to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551. The minutes are published in the Federal Reserve Bulletin and in the Board's annual report.                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 05-18559 Filed 9-16-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
# CE2004084EN.01004801.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/48

---

(2004/C 84 E/0053)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3053/03

by María Valenciano Martinez-Orozco (PSE) to the Commission

(9 October 2003)

Subject:   HIV/AIDS in China

Subject:

On 8 September 2003 Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a report entitled Locked Doors: People Living with HIV/AIDS in China, which describes how discrimination, lack of information, cover-ups, and lack of treatment for many patients are causing the spread of HIV/AIDS in China.

On 30 September 2003 the Spanish daily El Pais published the dramatic story of Zhang Xiaqing, an HIV-positive 11-year old, who contracted the virus from a blood transfusion in 1995 at the age of nine. His parents cannot afford treatment and he has been refused admission to school. His case is one of more than 250 000 according to Beijing — but more than one million according to organisations working to combat the disease — where infections were caused during the 1990s as a result of blood-purchasing networks in Henan province.

Although China has admitted the blood transfusions scandal and taken a number of measures, according to HRW it still allows provincial and local authorities to cover up the situation, preventing NGOs and journalists from visiting people with HIV/AIDS. According to the report, no officials have been prosecuted for the scandal, although some of those who tried to reveal its existence have been arrested for breaching state secrets.

The United Nations has warned that 10 million people will be infected by 2010 unless urgent measures are taken.

Will the Commission include on the agenda for the Fifth EU-China Summit, to be held at the end of October, the question of respect for the human rights of these sick and abandoned people and attempt to ensure at least that cases are brought to court in order to establish responsibility so that compensation can be paid to these persons, who will otherwise be inexorably condemned to suffer and die for want of treatment?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(7 November 2003)

(7 November 2003)

As stated in its recent Communication on EU-China relations, the Commission believes that the current spread of AIDS in the country poses a serious threat to China's long-term development and accordingly requires determined action. The Commission itself is engaged in efforts to combat the epidemic through its financing, from 1997 to the present day, of a new vaccines testing programme coordinated by the University of Regensburg's Institute for Medical Microbiology.

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's concerns regarding the situation of AIDS sufferers in China. At the 6th EU-China Summit in Beijing on 30 October, the Union once again raised the general issue of human rights. However, the bilateral dialogue on human rights conducted by the EU with China since 1996, whose next session is in Beijing on 25/26 November, seems the most appropriate forum for tackling the subject of AIDS victims.

---
null

430.23166