alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Terri YOUNG, Plaintiff, v. Daniel BAILEY, in his Official Capacity as Sheriff of Mecklenburg County, and Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, Defendants.

No. COA18-664

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: February 5, 2019

Kennedy, Kennedy, Kennedy and Kennedy, LLP, Winston-Salem, by Harvey L. Kennedy and Harold L. Kennedy, III, for plaintiff-appellant.

Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Charlotte, by Sean F. Perrin, for defendants-appellees.

STROUD, Judge.

The background of this case can be found in this Court's prior opinion of *Young v. Bailey* , 240 N.C. App. 595, 771 S.E.2d 628, (2015), *aff'd* , 368 N.C. 665, 781 S.E.2d 277 (2016). The prior appeal was filed in this same case and addressed the same claims and issues. *See* *id.* at 596, 771 S.E.2d at 629. Plaintiff Terri Young was a deputy sheriff in the Mecklenburg County Sheriff's Department. *Id.* Defendant Daniel Bailey was elected as sheriff, and defendant Bailey then terminated plaintiff's employment. *See id.* Plaintiff filed this lawsuit alleging she had been terminated for unlawful reasons. *See id.* Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, and the trial court granted summary judgment for defendants, dismissing plaintiff's claims. *Id.* Plaintiff appealed, and this Court affirmed the trial court's judgment. *Id.* at 601, 771 S.E.2d at 632. Plaintiff then petitioned the North Carolina Supreme Court for discretionary review, and the Supreme Court affirmed this Court's opinion in January of 2016. *See* *Young v. Bailey* , 368 N.C. 665, 781 S.E.2d 277.

In November of 2017, plaintiff filed a motion with the trial court under Rule 60(b)(6) for relief from judgment, arguing she was entitled to resurrect her claim based upon the United State Supreme Court's opinion in *Heffernan v. City of Patterson* , *N.J.* , 136 S. Ct. 1412, 194 L. Ed 2d 508 (2016), which was decided after the North Carolina Supreme Court had affirmed the dismissal of her claim. Plaintiff alleged *Heffernan* controls this case. On 16 February 2018, the trial court entered an order denying plaintiff's motion. Plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiff Young's case is in the same procedural position, and her argument is the same as the plaintiff's argument in *McLaughlin v. Bailey* , --- N.C. App. ----, ---, S.E.2d ----, ---- (Feb. 5, 2019), which is filed simultaneously with this opinion. For the same reasons as stated in *McLaughlin* , we reject plaintiff's argument. Based upon *McLaughlin* , we affirm the trial court's 16 February 2018 order denying plaintiff's Rule 60 motion.

AFFIRMED.

Report per Rule 30(e).

Judges DIETZ and BERGER concur.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 199 (Monday, October 17, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 60369]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20675]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--AAF Association, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 21, 2005, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), AAF Association, Inc. has 
filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General 
and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. 
The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Konan Technology, 
Inc., Seoul, Republic of Korea has been added as a party to this 
venture. Also, Korean Broadcasting System, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 
and Universitat Pompeau Fabra, Barcelona, Spain have withdrawn as 
parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and AAF Association, Inc. intends to 
file additional written notification disclosing all changes in 
membership.
    On March 28, 2000, AAF Association, Inc. filed its original 
notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of 
Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 
6(b) of the Act on June 29, 2000 (65 FR 40127).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 15, 
2005. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on July 11, 2005 (70 FR 39796).

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 05-20675 Filed 10-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
No. 17,415.

#### Nyberg *v.*Dwyer.

(280 P. [2d] 439)

Decided February 21, 1955.

Rehearing denied March 14, 1955.

Mr. James E. Griffith, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. McComb, Zarlengo & Mott, for defendant in error.

*En Banc.*

Per Curiam.

Judgment affirmed without written opinion. Mr. Justice Lindsley did not participate in the consideration of this case on review.
STATE of North Carolina, v. David Kenneth FOWLER, Defendant.

No. COA17-723

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 18, 2018

AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6389

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ZACHARY WILLIAMS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. John R. Hargrove, Senior District Judge;

Herbert N. Maletz, Senior Judge, sitting by designation. (CR-88-

227, CA-96-18-HAR)

Submitted: July 10, 1997 Decided: July 23, 1997

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Zachary Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United

States Attorney, Andrea L. Smith, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his

motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) (current version at 28

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Williams, Nos. CR-88-227; CA-96-18-HAR (D.

Md. Feb. 12, 1997). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL

338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

|  | 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, as of, and for the periods presented in the                Report. |
|--|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                    |   |                                                                   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Date:  September                25,                2007  | By:    | /s/ James              H. Hirst                              |   |
|                                                                    |   | James              H. Hirst                                            |   |
|                                                                    |   | Chief              Executive Officer,              President, Director |   |
|                                                                    |   | and              Principal Accounting              Officer             |   |
**Exhibit 15.2**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors   Infosys Technologies Limited 

 We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-32196) on Form S-8 and in the registration statement (No. 333-138491) on Form F-3 of Infosys Technologies Limited of our reports dated April 28, 2007, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Infosys Technologies Limited as of March 31, 2006 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended March 31, 2007, and related financial statement schedule II, management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2007 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2007, which reports appear in the March 31, 2007 annual report on Form 20-F of Infosys Technologies Limited. 

KPMG  Bangalore, India   May 2, 2007
ex101.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 




  





1











  






 


 




  





2











  






 


 




  





3











  






 


 




  





4











  






 


 




  





5











  






 


 




  





6











  






 


 




  





7











  






 


 




  





8











  






 


 


9
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1
                     List of Subsidiaries of the Companies
                     -------------------------------------

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

Subsidiary                                             Jurisdiction
----------                                             ------------
<S>                                                   <C>
Simon Property Group, L.P.                                 Delaware
SPG Realty Consultants, L.P.                               Delaware
SPG Properties, Inc.                                       Delaware
SD Property Group, Inc.                                        Ohio
The Retail Property Trust                             Massachusetts
Simon Property Group (Illinois), L.P.                      Illinois
Simon Property Group (Texas), L.P.                            Texas
Shopping Center Associates                                 New York
DeBartolo Capital Partnership                              Delaware
Simon Capital Limited Partnership                          Delaware
SDG Macerich Properties, L.P.                              Delaware
M.S. Management Associates, Inc.                           Delaware
DeBartolo Properties Management, Inc.                          Ohio
Mayflower Realty LLC                                       Delaware
</TABLE>

     Omits names of subsidiaries which as of December 31, 1999 were not, in the
aggregate, a "significant subsidiary".

                                      48
#### In re Douglas C. ELLIS.

No. 2003-OB-1478.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 27, 2003.

ORDER

Considering the Petition for Voluntary Permanent Resignation from the Practice of Law filed by Douglas C. Ellis, and the concurrence thereto filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel,

IT IS ORDERED that the request of Douglas C. Ellis, Louisiana Bar Roll number 5829, for permanent resignation in lieu of discipline be and is hereby granted, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 20.1.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Douglas C. Ellis shall be permanently prohibited from practicing law in Louisiana or in any other jurisdiction in which he is admitted to the practice of law; shall be permanently prohibited from seeking readmission to the practice of law in this state or in any other jurisdiction in which he is admitted; and shall be permanently prohibited from seeking admission to the practice of law in any jurisdiction.

/s/ Chet D. Traylor

Justice, Supreme Court of Louisiana
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  of  Mondial  Ventures,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  in the  capacities  and  on  the  dates  indicated  below,  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 his 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.


Date:  June 21, 2006


/s/ Scott Taylor
-------------------------------------------
Scott Taylor, President and C.E.O.
(Principal Executive Officer)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Education

# For Further Information Contact:

                        Dr. Lungching Chiao or Ms. Michelle Guilfoil, International Education Programs Service, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, NW., 6th floor, Washington, DC 20006-8521. Telephone: (202) 502-7624 or (202) 502-7625 or by e-mail:                         *lungching.chiao@ed.gov*                         or                         *michelle.guilfoil@ed.gov*

                        If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call                               ( print page 59062)                            the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.                     

Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact person listed in this section. 

## VIII. Other Information 

*Electronic Access to This Document:*                         You may view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the                         **Federal Register**                        , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:                         *http://www.ed.gov/​news/​fedregister*

To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.

# Note:

                            The official version of this document is the document published in the                             **Federal Register**                            . Free Internet access to the official edition of the                             **Federal Register**                             and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at:                             *www.gpoaccess.gov/​nara/​index.html*

Dated: October 5, 2005. 

Sally L. Stroup, 

Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 05-20367 Filed 10-7-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000-01-U
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 Annual Report of Now Auto Group, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the three months ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Scott Miller, Chief Executive Officer/ Financial Officer and Chief
Operating Officer of the Company, certify in my capacities as officer of the
Company, 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 our
knowledge:
 
 (1)
              The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
  and
 
 (2)
              The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
      as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
    Report.
 
 By:
                  /s/ Scott MillerScott
      MillerChief
      Executive OfficerFebruary
      24, 2008/s/ Faith ForbisFaith
      ForbisChief
      Financial OfficerFebruary
      24, 2008
exhibit10-7.htm




 










	  	  	  
	
Notice of Grant of

	  	
LSI CORPORATION


	
Restricted Stock Unit Award

	  	
ID: 94-2712976


	
Under the

	  	
1320 Ridder Park Drive


	
LSI Corporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan

	  	
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95131







 










	  	  	  	  
	
GRANTEE NAME

	  	
Award Number:

	  
	
Address

	  	
Grant Date:

	  
	
Address

	  	
Number of Restricted Stock Units:

	  





 









 


On the grant date shown above, LSI Corporation granted you the number of restricted stock units shown above under the LSI Corporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan.  If and when it vests, each restricted stock unit entitles you to receive one share of LSI common stock.  We typically will withhold some of the shares you would receive when the restricted stock units vest to satisfy applicable tax or similar withholding obligations. 


 


 


Your award will vest according to the vesting schedule shown below. Vesting will occur only if [any applicable performance requirements indicated below have been met and] you have not incurred a Termination of Service prior to the vesting date. 


 



	  	  	  	  	  
	
Shares

	  	
Vesting Date

	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  





 









 


By your signature below, you agree that this award is governed by this Notice of Grant, the attached Restricted Stock Unit Agreement and the LSI Corporation 2003 Equity Incentive Plan. You acknowledge that you have received, read and understand this Notice of Grant, the attached agreement and the plan. You agree to accept as binding all decisions or interpretations of the Board of Directors of LSI or its delegate regarding any questions relating to the plan, this Notice of Grant or the attached agreement. 


 










	  	  	  
	
________________________________________________

	  	  
	
GRANTEE NAME

	  	  
	
Date:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-7260

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

JULIUS JOSEPHUS MARSHALL, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District 

Judge. (2:03-cr-00076-JBF-TEM-1) 

Submitted: November 17, 2008 Decided: December 18, 2008 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Julius Josephus Marshall, Appellant Pro Se. William David Muhr, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Julius Josephus Marshall appeals the district court’s 

order granting in part his motion for reduction of sentence 

under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for 

the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. 

Marshall, No. 2:03-cr-00076-JBF-TEM-1 (E.D. Va. filed July 3, 

2008 & entered July 7, 2008). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 1369** 

THERESA N. FERGUSON , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

LOR ETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, CHARLES PHILIP ROSENBERG, Director, Drug Enforcement Administration , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. T.S. Ellis , III , Senior District Judge. ( 1:14

- cv
- 01641

- TSE

- JFA )

Submitted : October 20 , 201 5 Decided: October 22, 2015

Before MOTZ, K EENAN , and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Theresa N. Ferguson, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Lauren Anne Wetzler, Assistant United States Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appelle es.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Theresa N. Ferguson appeals the district court ’ s order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment

. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appell ant’s
brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Ferguson’s informal
brief does not challenge the district court’s holding that
summary judgment was appropriate where Ferguson did not exhaust
her administrative remedies in good faith, Ferguson has
forfeited a ppellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly , we affirm the district court ’ s judgment . We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-19-00772-CR

Carlos ROMO, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 111th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-CRF-001456-D2

Honorable Monica Z. Notzon, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is 

AFFIRMED with respect to Counts I and II. With respect to Count III, the trial court’s judgment 

is REVERSED and a judgment of acquittal is RENDERED on Count III.

SIGNED May 26, 2021.

_____________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice