alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Isaiah BONGAM, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-1759.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 31, 2005.

Decided Feb. 28, 2005.

Sean D. Hummel, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. William B. Tiller, Beatytiller, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Isaiah Bongam appeals the district court’s order granting judgment as a matter of law under Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(a), in favor of Costco Wholesale Corporation (“Costco”). We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the joint appendix and find no reversible error. We agree with Bongam that his testimony was subject to more than one interpretation and, therefore, that judgment as a matter of law based upon contributory negligence was not appropriate. *Ocheltree v. Scollon Prods., Inc.,*335 F.3d 325, 331 (4th Cir.2003) (en banc) (“Judgment as a matter of law is *465proper only if ‘there can be but one reasonable conclusion as to the verdict.’ ”) (quoting *Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.,*477 U.S. 242, 250, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986)), *cert. denied,*540 U.S. 1177, 124 S.Ct. 1406, 158 L.Ed.2d 77 (2004). We nevertheless affirm the district court’s judgment on alternative grounds. *See United States v. Smith,*395 F.3d 516, 518-19 (4th Cir.2005) (‘We are not limited to evaluation of the grounds offered by the district court to support its decision, but may affirm on any grounds apparent from the record.”).

Our review of the trial testimony leads us to conclude that, had the jury considered the testimony relating to Bongam’s claim of negligence, the jury could have drawn only one reasonable conclusion— that Bongam faded to establish a prima facie case of negligence. *See Horridge v. St. Mary’s County Dep’t of Soc. Servs.,*382 Md. 170, 854 A.2d 1232, 1238 (2004) (discussing prima facie case); *Moulden v. Greenbelt Consumer Servs., Inc.,*239 Md. 229, 210 A.2d 724, 725-26 (1965). Accordingly, we affirm. 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 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements of Continental Airlines, Inc. and each related Prospectus of our reports dated February 20, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Continental Airlines, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Continental Airlines, Inc., included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Continental Airlines, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007.

Form	Description
S-8	1997 Stock Incentive Plan (No. 333-23165)

S-8	1998 Stock Incentive Plan (No. 333-57297)

S-8	2000 Incentive Plan (No. 333-39762)

S-8	2004 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (No. 333-113444)

S-8	Supplemental Saving Plan for Management Pilots (No. 333-50938)

S-8            2005 Broad Based Employee Stock Option Plan and 2005 Pilot Supplemental 

Option Plan (No. 333-126891)

S-8 	Incentive Plan 2000 - additional 1.5 million shares of Class B Common Stock (No. 333-134904)

S-3	Registration Statement relating to Warrants, Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock and sales by certain Selling Security holders and the related Prospectus (No. 333-09739)

S-3	Registration Statement relating to $500,000,000 of the Company's Debt Securities, Class B Common Stock, Preferred Stock, Stock Purchase Contracts, Stock Purchase Units, Depositary Shares, Warrants, Junior Subordinated Trust Debentures and Guarantee of Trust Preferred Securities and Trust Preferred Securities of Continental Airlines Finance Trust III (Universal Shelf) and the related Prospectus (No. 333-71906)

S-3	Registration Statement relating to $250,000,000 of Term Income Deferrable Equity Securities (TIDES) of Continental Airlines Finance Trust II, and Convertible Junior Subordinated Debentures, a Preferred Securities Guarantee of the TIDES and Class B Common Stock of the Company (No. 333-55144)

S-3	Registration Statement relating to $175,000,000 of the Company's 5% Convertible Notes due 2023 (No. 333-108576)

S-3            Registration Statement relating to $1 billion of the Company's Debt Securities, 

		Class B Common Stock, Preferred Stock, Stock Purchase Contracts, Stock Purchase Units, Depositary Shares, Warrants, Subscription Rights and Pass Through Certificates, and the related Prospectus (No. 333-128289)
S-3ASR 	Automatic Shelf Registration Statement relating to the Company's Debt Securities, Class B Common Stock, Preferred Stock, Stock Purchase Contracts, Stock Purchase Units, Depositary Shares, Warrants, Subscription Rights and Pass Through Certificates, and the related Prospectuses (No. 333-133187)

 

	ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Houston, Texas
<PAGE>

[Ryder Scott Company logo]


                  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS

    As independent oil and gas consultants, Ryder Scott Company, L.P., hereby
consents to the use of our reserve reports dated as of December 31, 1999,
December 31, 2000, and December 31, 2001 and to all references to our firm
included in or made a part of the Mission Resources Corporation's Form 10-K to
be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about March 28, 2002.



                                        /s/ Ryder Scott Company, L.P.
                                        ------------------------------
                                        RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.

March 28, 2002
Houston, Texas
#### STATE v. HARMON

No. 26.

Case below: 31 N.C. App. 368.

Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 7 January 1977.
# L_2009087EN.01017401.xml

| 31.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 87/174 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 87/174

---

Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on advanced therapy medicinal products and amending Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 324 of 10 December 2007
  )

On page 131, Article 28, Amendments to Directive 2001/83/EC, point 4:

for:

‘4.   in Article 6(1), the first subparagraph shall be replaced by the following:

“No medicinal product may be placed on the market of a Member State unless a marketing authorisation has been issued by the competent authorities of that Member State in accordance with this Directive or an authorisation has been granted in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, read in conjunction with Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007.”
  ’,

read:

‘4.   in Article 6(1), the first subparagraph shall be replaced by the following:

“No medicinal product may be placed on the market of a Member State unless a marketing authorisation has been issued by the competent authorities of that Member State in accordance with this Directive or an authorisation has been granted in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, read in conjunction with Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use (*1) and Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007.

---

(*1)  
  OJ L 378, 27.12.2006, p. 1.”
  ’

*1

---
#### Isaac ROBY, Jr. v. Officer George SKUPIEN.

No. 90 C 4104.

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.

April 30, 1991.

See also 758 F.Supp. 471.

Isaac Roby, Jr., pro se.

David R. Schmidt, Lord, Bissell & Brook, Chicago, Ill., for defendant.

ORDER

BUA, District Judge.

Isaac Roby has filed a *pro se*complaint against Officer George Skupien, a member of the Conrail police force, charging Officer Skupien with violating his constitutional rights. Since filing suit, Roby has attempted to recover attorney’s fees as the attorney of record. His request was denied because he is proceeding as his own attorney in the case. To circumvent that problem, Roby sought the services of an attorney. In his letter requesting the services, Roby spelled out what he had in mind:

> Here’s the play, I sued Conrail for 25 million dollars, I asked for the attorney fees, so they couldn’t catch me up in “22”, all I need for you to do for me is to step-up and say that you are the attorney of record, and file for my attorney fee’s, I’ll share it with you, I’m going to file for two & a half million in attorney’s fees....

The court finds Roby’s suggestion to be an inappropriate request for legal services. Moreover, his words are an indication of the sham nature of his lawsuit. Roby appears more preoccupied with the recovery of attorney’s fees than the outcome of his suit. His use of the phrases “here’s the play” and “they couldn’t catch me up in ‘22’ ” support the conclusion that the suit is just another scam to obtain money, much like his bid for attorney’s fees.

“There is ... well-established authority that this court has broad, inherent power to *sua sponte*dismiss an action ... which is frivolous, sham, vexatious or brought in bad faith.” *Ramsey v. United States,*448 F.Supp. 1264, 1276 (N.D.Ill.1978); *Rhinehart v. Stauffer,*638 F.2d 1169, 1171 (9th Cir.1980). When the court uses its broad, inherent power to dismiss an action *sua sponte,*it is not necessary that the party be afforded notice or an opportunity to be heard. *Ramsey,*448 F.Supp. at 1276.

The court finds that its inherent power should be utilized in this case. Roby’s words and actions show that his suit was brought in bad faith. While a court is obliged to construe a *pro se*litigant’s allegations liberally, a court need not countenance a sham lawsuit or a lawsuit brought in bad faith. Accordingly, Roby’s suit is dismissed.
# C_2008125EN.01000601.xml

| 22.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 125/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 125/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4746 — Deutsche Bahn/English Welsh & Scottish Railway Holdings (EWS))

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 125/03)

On 6 November 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1) in conjunction with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4746. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4746. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF

THE
TRUSTEE*

OF THE SAN JUAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUST

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350

In connection with the accompanying report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, and filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Lee Ann Anderson, Vice President and Senior Trust Officer of Compass Bank, on behalf of Compass Bank, the Trustee of the San Juan Basin Royalty Trust (the Trust), not in its
individual capacity but solely as Trustee of the Trust, hereby certify that:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies in all material respects with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (as explained in Note 3 to the Trusts financial statements, in
accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 47, released September 16, 1982, the Trust prepares its financial statements in a manner that differs from generally accepted accounting principles; such
presentation is customary to other royalty trusts); and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



COMPASS BANK, AS TRUSTEE OF THESAN JUAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUSTBy:

/s/ Lee Ann AndersonName:

Lee Ann AndersonTitle:

Vice President and Senior Trust OfficerDate: March 3, 2014




|* | The Trust has no executive officers.
|- | ------------------------------------
#### STAFFORD v. FOOD WORLD

No. 95 PC.

Case below: 31 N.C. App. 213.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 7 December 1976.
**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 Ameriprise Certificate Company (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Abu M. Arif, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Ross P. Palacios, as Principal and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of 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/   Abu M. Arif      |                            |   |
|------------------------|---------------------------------|--------|
| Name:                  | Abu   M. Arif                   |   |   |
| Title:                 | Chief   Executive Officer       |   |   |
|                   | (Principal   Executive Officer) |   |   |
| Date:                  | May 1,   2013              |   |   |
|                   |                            |   |   |
|                   |                            |   |   |
| /s/   Ross P. Palacios |                            |   |
| Name:                  | Ross   P. Palacios              |   |   |
| Title:                 | Chief   Financial Officer       |   |   |
|                   | (Principal   Financial Officer) |   |   |
| Date:                  | May 1,   2013              |   |   |

 

E-4

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1783 

OSCAR L. WRIGHT,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

GWALTNEY OF SMITHFIELD, LTD.,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Walter D. Kelley, Jr., District

Judge. (2:06-cv-00312-WDK)

Submitted: October 18, 2007 Decided: October 22, 2007

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Oscar L. Wright, Appellant Pro Se. James Phillip Naughton,

HUNTON & WILLIAMS, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Oscar L. Wright appeals the district court’s dismissal of

his civil action alleging employment discrimination under Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment

Act. We agree with the district court that Wright failed to

provide evidence to support a claim that his firing was motivated

by racial or age-based discrimination. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Wright v. Gwaltney

of Smithfield, No. 2:06-cv-00312-WDK (E.D. Va. filed July 16, 2007

& entered July 18, 2007). 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
|     |                                                                                               |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1) | Section 2 of the agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: |

|     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2) | This Amendment may be executed by the parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be an original but all of which taken together will constitute one and the same instrument. |

|     |                                                                                           |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (3) | Except to the extent amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. |
# L_2007183EN.01001201.xml

| 13.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 183/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 183/12

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 817/2007

of 12 July 2007

granting no export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 581/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 581/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain types of butter (2) provides for a permanent tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 581/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain types of butter (2) provides for a permanent tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate not to grant any refund for the tendering period ending on 10 July 2007. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate not to grant any refund for the tendering period ending on 10 July 2007.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 581/2004, for the tendering period ending on 10 July 2007 no export refund shall be granted for the products and destinations referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 July 2007.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 12 July 2007.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1913/2005 (OJ L 307, 25.11.2005, p. 2).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 64. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 276/2007 (OJ L 76, 16.3.2007, p. 16).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 58. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 128/2007 (OJ L 41, 13.2.2007, p. 6).

3

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

    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 WMS Industries Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brian R. Gamache,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Brian R. Gamache
--------------------
Brian R. Gamache
Chief Executive Officer
September 20, 2002
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5375 

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 relating to de minimis entries. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 25, 2010 

Mr. OWENS (for himself and Mr. MCDERMOTT) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 relating to de minimis 

entries. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Customs De Minimis 

5 Adjustment Act of 2010’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DE MINIMIS ENTRIES. 

7 Section 321(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 

8 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C)) is amended by striking ‘‘$200’’ and 

9 inserting ‘‘$1,000’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS