alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 17

- 1375 C Filed: June 28, 2022

GREGORY D. MARSH ,

P laintiff ,

v.

THE UNITED STATES,

D efendant

.

ORDER

On April 8, 2022, the Court directed that an amended complaint be filed in this case by May 31, 2022

, challenging the ABCMR ’s final decision on remand

. (ECF No. 47). On May 25, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s counsel’s request to withdraw from this mat ter and stayed all deadline s for thirty (30) days to allow the Plaintiff to retain new counsel

. (ECF No. 52). That Order directed Plaintiff to file a notice with the Clerk’s office “as soon as possible,” informing the Court of his current contact informati on for notifications of future filings in this case. ( Id .). The O rder also directed Plaintiff to file either a motion for substitution of counsel or a notice informing the Court of Plaintiff’s intention to proceed pro se by June 24, 2022. ( Id .). Plaintiff has not filed either. If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with the C o urt ’ s rules and order, the Cour t may dismiss the action on its own motio n for failure to prosecute . RCFC 41(b). Instead, Plaintiff has notified the Court a nd the Defendant’s counsel that he does not wish to pursue this case anymore. ( Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss at 6, ECF No. 53). The United States filed a consent motion to dismiss on June 24, 2022. ( Id .).

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the United States’ consent motion t o dismiss (ECF No. 53) . All remaining claims in this case are dismissed as moot under RCFC 12(b)(1)

. See B & B Med. Servs., Inc. v. United States , 114 Fed. Cl. 658, 662 (2014) ( “ When a matter becomes moot, we lose subject

- matter jurisdicti on over it, and dismissal under RCFC 12(b)(1) is in order. ” )

. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly. The telephonic status conference previously scheduled in this case for June 29, 2022

, is hereby CANCELED

.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ David A. Tapp DAVID A. TAPP, Judge
#### SUPERIOR INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Cheryl D. CORDLE, Appellee.

No. 1D02-0797.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 26, 2003.

Anthony J. Russo and Kim E. Wells, of Butler Burnette Pappas LLP, Tampa, for Appellant.

George T. Reeves, of Davis, Schnitker, Reeves & Browning, P.A., Madison; and T. Bradley McRae, of T. Bradley McRae, P.A., Lake City, for Appellee.

BARFIELD, J.

Appellant challenges the amount of attorney fees awarded to its insured pursuant to section 627.428, Florida Statutes. Specifically, it argues that the trial court erred as a matter of law in applying a “contingent risk” multiplier to more than double the “lodestar” amount which had been calculated based upon a reasonable number of hours and a reasonable hourly fee. The parties agree that there is no dispute in this appeal regarding the factual findings of the trial court’s order, and that the court’s legal rulings are therefore reviewed *de novo,*citing *Menendez v. The Palms West Condominium Ass’n, Inc.,*736 So.2d 58 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). We agree with appellant that use of a “contingent risk” multiplier was inappropriate in the circumstances.

The trial court found in its order that the attorney’s representation of the insured “was not contingent within the meaning of Rules of Professional Conduct 4-1.5” and that “the contractual arrangement” between the insured and her attorney, in which the attorney “would have technically been entitled to recover his fee up to $200.00 per hour from the client, win or lose,” but agreed to accept “a reasonable fee awarded by the Court” pursuant to section 627.428, “is not considered a contingent fee arrangement as contemplat*208ed by Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, Rule 4-1.5.” The trial court apparently based its decision to use the “contingent risk” multiplier on its finding that the fee in either case would be contingent on the attorney winning the case, because of the insured’s “indigent financial condition.” However, the likelihood that the client will not pay the agreed-upon hourly fee is not the criterium upon which “contingency” in this context is based.

Because we find that, based on the facts as found by the trial court, the fee agreement was not “contingent” within the meaning of *Standard Guar. Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom,*555 So.2d 828 (Fla.1990), the order is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED to the trial court for entry of an attorney fee award that does not use a “contingent risk” multiplier.

WOLF and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
LILLIE v. CARVER

421P10-6

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 17, 2017

Anne M. Middleton, Special Deputy Attorney General, Patrick Nadolski, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Robert Alan Lillie, for Lillie, Robert Alan

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th of June 2017 by Petitioner for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of August 2017."
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 189 (Friday, September 30, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 57294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19559]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee 
(HICPAC)

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces the following meeting.

    Name: Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee.
    Times and Dates: 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., October 24, 2005; 8:30 a.m.-4 
p.m., October 25, 2005.
    Place: Sheraton Colony Square, 188 14th Street, NE., Atlanta, 
Georgia 30361.
    Status: Open to the public, limited only by the space available.
    Purpose: The committee is charged with providing advice and 
guidance to the Secretary; the Assistant Secretary for Health; the 
Director, CDC; and the Director, National Center for Infectious 
Diseases (NCID), regarding (1) the practice of hospital infection 
control; (2) strategies for surveillance, prevention, and control of 
infections (e.g., nosocomial infections), antimicrobial resistance, 
and related events in settings where healthcare is provided; and (3) 
periodic updating of guidelines and other policy statements 
regarding prevention of healthcare-associated infections and 
healthcare-related conditions.
    Matters to be Discussed: Agenda items will include finalizing 
recommendations for isolation precautions to prevent transmission of 
infectious agents in healthcare settings, update on public 
reporting, and updates on CDC activities of interest to the 
committee.
    Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.
    Contact Person for More Information: Harriette Lynch, Committee 
Management Specialist, HICPAC, Division of Healthcare Quality 
Promotion, NCID, CDC, l600 Clifton Road, NE, M/S A-07, Atlanta, 
Georgia 30333, telephone 404/498-1182.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining 
to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry.

    Dated: September 26, 2005.
Diane Allen,
Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 05-19559 Filed 9-29-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
#### STATE ex rel. Kevin BREWER v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2002-KH-2231.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 2003.

In re Brewer, Kevin; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial *623Writs, Parish of Orleans, Orleans Magistrate Court, No. 365980; Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 413-926; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-K-0997.

Denied.
# Official Journal L 248/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 248 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6413 July 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 248

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6413 July 2021

---

| Contents | | I   Legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2021/1133 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 amending Regulations (EU) No 603/2013, (EU) 2016/794, (EU) 2018/1862, (EU) 2019/816 and (EU) 2019/818 as regards the establishment of the conditions for accessing other EU information systems for the purposes of the Visa Information System | 1 |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2021/1134 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 amending Regulations (EC) No 767/2008, (EC) No 810/2009, (EU) 2016/399, (EU) 2017/2226, (EU) 2018/1240, (EU) 2018/1860, (EU) 2018/1861, (EU) 2019/817 and (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Decisions 2004/512/EC and 2008/633/JHA, for the purpose of reforming the Visa Information System | 11 |

Contents

I   Legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Regulation (EU) 2021/1133 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 amending Regulations (EU) No 603/2013, (EU) 2016/794, (EU) 2018/1862, (EU) 2019/816 and (EU) 2019/818 as regards the establishment of the conditions for accessing other EU information systems for the purposes of the Visa Information System

1

*

Regulation (EU) 2021/1134 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 amending Regulations (EC) No 767/2008, (EC) No 810/2009, (EU) 2016/399, (EU) 2017/2226, (EU) 2018/1240, (EU) 2018/1860, (EU) 2018/1861, (EU) 2019/817 and (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Decisions 2004/512/EC and 2008/633/JHA, for the purpose of reforming the Visa Information System

11

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
#### Kenneth R. GILBERT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D03-1105.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 20, 2003.

Kenneth R. Gilbert, Raiford, pro se.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Claudine M. LaFrance, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth R. Gilbert appeals an order summarily denying his rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief and the order denying his motion for rehearing. We affirm without discussion as to appellant’s first three grounds for postconviction relief, but reverse the summary denial as to the fourth ground.

Following a jury trial, appellant was found guilty of burglary of an occupied structure. At trial, Eugene Gallina testified that he arrived for work at Tropical Shipping at 5:00 a.m. and saw a man walking around the back of the warehouse with a set of bolt cutters and a Snap-on toolbox. He looked suspicious, so Gallina walked over and asked who he was. When Gallina approached, the man ran out of the building, and Gallina could not catch up to him. On returning to the building, Gallina found a wallet on the floor. It contained appellant’s photo identification, which appeared to Gallina to be the same person he had just seen. At trial, however, Gallina was not certain that appellant was the man he had seen.

We find facially sufficient appellant’s fourth ground for relief, alleging that his *398trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and call an alibi witness, Ce-phus Russel. According to the motion, appellant timely gave his counsel Russel’s name and where he could be located. Russel was willing and able to testify. Russel’s testimony could have exonerated him, or at least could have cast doubt on his guilt. He alleges that Russel would have testified that appellant was with him at another location from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., when the offense occurred. *See Eubanks v. State,*819 So.2d 880 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); *Stringer v. State,*757 So.2d 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).

The order of summary denial is reversed as to the fourth ground for relief and remanded for either an evidentiary hearing or the trial court’s attachment of record portions conclusively refuting appellant’s fourth ground for relief.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

POLEN, TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.
United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 11, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 03-60162

ESTATE OF JERALD J. GESKE, Virginia Geske Administratrix;

VIRGINIA GESKE

Plaintiffs - Appellants

VERSUS

DANNY R. WILLIAMSON; ET AL

Defendants

UNITED HEALTHCARE OF MISSISSIPPI, INC.;

Defendant - Appellee

 

CANAL INDEMNITY COMPANY

Plaintiff

VERSUS

VIRGINIA GESKE, ETC.; ET AL

Defendants

VIRGINIA GESKE, Individually as and as Administratrix of Estate of

Jerald Geske, Deceased; UNITED HEALTHCARE OF MISSISSIPPI, INC.;

Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Mississippi, Hattiesburg

2:01-CV-324
*District Judge of the Western District of Louisiana, sitting by

designation.

**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.

2

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges, and LITTLE*,

District Judge.

PER CURIAM:**

The survivors of Jerald J. Geske prosecute this appeal of an

interlocutory order certified by the district court and challenge

the district court’s dismissal of his action against United

Healthcare(United) for fraudulent misrepresentations under

Mississippi law. The district court dismissed the state law claim

on grounds that it was preempted by ERISA. The district court also

held that the Geskes’ state law claim against United’s agent,

Williamson, was not preempted and that the Geskes had a valid ERISA

claim against United for medical benefits. The only issue before

us in this interlocutory appeal is whether the Geskes state law

claim against United for fraudulent misrepresentation is preempted

by ERISA.

After reviewing the record, reading the briefs of the parties,

and hearing argument of counsel we conclude that properly

characterized, the Geskes’ claim seeks damages for United’s failure

to pay medical benefits under the COBRA provisions of United’s

policy, which was a part of the ERISA plan of Mr. Geske’s former

employer, Barnes Trucking Co. Because this action asserts a claim
3

for ERISA benefits and damages for failing to timely pay those

benefits, the district court correctly concluded that this action

is preempted by ERISA.

AFFIRMED.
IB 

Union Calendar No. 503 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4253 

[Report No. 113–671, Part I] 

To permanently withdraw, reserve, and transfer Bureau of Land Management 

lands used for military purposes in Alaska, Nevada, and New Mexico 

to the appropriate Secretary of the military department concerned. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 14, 2014 

Mr. BISHOP of Utah (for himself, Mr. AMODEI, Mr. PEARCE, and Mr. YOUNG

of Alaska) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Armed 

Services, 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 

DECEMBER 12, 2014 

Reported from the Committee on Natural Resources 

DECEMBER 12, 2014 

The Committee on Armed Services discharged; committed to the Committee 

of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4253 RH

A BILL 

To permanently withdraw, reserve, and transfer Bureau of 

Land Management lands used for military purposes in 

Alaska, Nevada, and New Mexico to the appropriate 

Secretary of the military department concerned. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4253 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF TERMINATION DATE. 

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 

5 ‘‘Bureau of Land Management Withdrawn Military Lands 

6 Efficiency and Savings Act’’. 

7 (b) IN GENERAL.—Section 3015(a) of the Military 

8 Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999 (Public Law 106–65) is 

9 amended by striking ‘‘shall’’ the first place it appears and 

10 all that follows through the period and inserting ‘‘shall not 

11 terminate other than by an election and determination of 

12 the Secretary of the military department concerned or 

13 until such time as the Secretary of the Interior can perma14 nently transfer administrative jurisdiction of the lands 

15 withdrawn and reserved by this Act to the Secretary of 

16 the military department concerned.’’. 

17 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 3016 of the 

18 Military Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999 (Public Law 106– 

19 65) is repealed. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 503 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4253 

[Report No. 113–671, Part I] 

A BILL 

To permanently withdraw, reserve, and transfer 

tary department concerned. Mexico to the appropriate Secretary of the milimilitary purposes in Alaska, Nevada, and New Bureau of Land Management lands used for 

DECEMBER 12, 2014 

Reported from the Committee on Natural Resources 

DECEMBER 12, 2014 

The Committee on Armed Services discharged; committed 

the Union and ordered to be printed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
In the Matter of G.J.J., B.J., H.R.J.

No. COA15-932.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

April 5, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
## ^

2/17/2015 BENAVIDEZ, ALBERTO 

### On this day, the supplemental clerk's recorder)Responseto the order issued by this Court, has been received and presented tO-tfe/Court OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 

## ©FFJDtii-8i£ilN55&- STATE OF TEXA§' 

## PENALTY FOR' ' PRIVATE USE.*?/ «•* FEB 25 2015 

## Tr. Ct/No. 20090T^0l|^-^DFROM2,WR^22Cf-01



# bv\t* e> ALBERTO B Abel Acosta, Clerk



# "V"-KiJ -filetU-Kf ^\<&> ^ 

### \^
#### Kristy JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Commission on Ethics, Appellee.

No. 1D02-2841.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 14, 2003.

Appellant, pro se, of Carlton Fields, P.A., Tallahassee.

Peter D. Ostreich, Staff Attorney, and Philip C. Claypool, General Counsel, Commission on Ethics, Tallahassee, for Appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

We decline to reach the merits of Kristy Johnson’s appeal from an advisory opinion of the Florida Commission on Ethics, because we conclude that her challenge, based upon application of the two-year representation bar of section 112.313(9)(a)4, Florida Statutes (2001), is now moot. Without prejudice to Johnson’s right to appeal later from an order of the Commission upon an adequate showing of injury, we DISMISS this appeal as moot.

ERVIN, BARFIELD and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
# Official Journal C 89E/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.CE2013.089.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 89E |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5627 March 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.CE2013.089.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 89E

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5627 March 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | COUNCIL |
| 2013/C 089E/01 | Position (EU) No 2/2013 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999Adopted by the Council on 25 February 2013 | 1 |
| Commission statement | 24 |
| Commission statement | 24 |
| Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission | 24 |

Notice No

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

COUNCIL

2013/C 089E/01

Position (EU) No 2/2013 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999Adopted by the Council on 25 February 2013

1

Commission statement

24

Commission statement

24

Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission

24

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 21.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES



|                                                                  |  |                             
|----------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|Subsidiary                                                        |  | Jurisdiction of Organization
|Corinthian Schools, Inc.                                          |  | Delaware                    
|Rhodes Colleges, Inc.                                             |  | Delaware                    
|Rhodes Business Group, Inc.                                       |  | Delaware                    
|Florida Metropolitan University, Inc.                             |  | Florida                     
|Corinthian Property Group, Inc.                                   |  | Florida                     
|Grand Rapids Educational Center, Inc.                             |  | Michigan                    
|National School of Technology, Inc.                               |  | Florida                     
|Ward Stone College, Inc.                                          |  | Florida                     
|Titan Schools, Inc. (formerly known as WyoTech Acquisition Corp.) |  | Delaware                    
|MJB Acquisition Corp.                                             |  | Wyoming                     
|Pegasus Education, Inc.                                           |  | Delaware                    
|Career Choices, Inc.                                              |  | California                  
|Sequoia Education, Inc.                                           |  | California                  
|Ashmead Education, Inc.                                           |  | Washington                  
|Eton Education, Inc.                                              |  | Washington                  
|ECAT Acquisition, Inc.                                            |  | Delaware                    
|CDI Education USA, Inc.                                           |  | Delaware                    
|Everest Colleges Canada, Inc.                                     |  | Canada                      
|Career Canada C.F.P. Limited                                      |  | Canada                      
|Heald College, LLC                                                |  | California                  
|Heald Real Estate, LLC                                            |  | Delaware                    
|Heald Education, LLC                                              |  | Delaware                    
|Heald Capital, LLC                                                |  | Delaware                    
|SP PE VII-B Heald Holdings Corporation                            |  | Delaware                    
|SD III-B Heald Holdings Corporation                               |  | Delaware