alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense POW/MIA Accounting AgencyFulfilling Our Nation's Promise

Search
Search

Search

              - 
              - 
              - 

-  Home		 
-  Families		 
-  Our Missing    -  Searchable List of the Missing             
  -  Searchable Map of the Missing             
  -  Recently Accounted For             
  -  World War II      -  World War II Summary             
    -  Battle of Tarawa             
    -  Attack on Pearl Harbor 
  -  Korean War      -  Korean War Summary             
    -  Battle of Chosin Reservoir             
    -  Battle of Unsan             
    -  Korean Air Battles             
    -  The Inchon Campaign             
    -  The Pusan Perimeter             
    -  The DMZ Campaigns             
    -  Korean War Disinterments             
    -  Operation Glory             
    -  POW Camps 
  -  Vietnam War      -  Vietnam War Summary             
    -  Vietnam War Identification Project             
    -  Tet Offensive             
    -  Battle of Khe Sanh             
    -  Mayaguez Incident             
    -  Battle of Ia Drang             
    -  Lam Son 
  -  Cold War             
  -  Gulf Wars & Libya             
  -  Unknowns 
-  News & Stories    -  Our Stories             
  -  Press Releases             
  -  DPAA In The News             
  -  Year In Review 
-  Multimedia    -  Livestreams             
  -  Podcast             
  -  Briefing Videos             
  -  Science Videos             
  -  DPAA Laboratory             
  -  Media Gallery 
-  Resources    -  FAQs             
  -  AFMES DNA Laboratory             
  -  Publicly Released Documents             
  -  Family/VSO Update Notes             
  -  Family Member Guide             
  -  POW/MIA Day Toolkit             
  -  USRJC 
-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Vision-Mission-Values             
  -  DPAA Organizational Chart 
-  Contact    -  Contact Us             
  -  Join Us      -  Careers 
  -  Report a Site             
  -  Donate to the Mission 
-  Volunteer		 

## News Release

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Soldier Accounted For From World War II (Owens, D.)

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

MICHAEL BROWN, a/k/a Michael A. Brown, a/k/a Michael Andrew Brown, a/k/a Karim Clark, a/k/a Karin Clark, a/k/a Jakari Wallace

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No s . 4D 17

- 3771 & 4D17

- 3772

[ July 26, 2018 ]

Consolidated a ppeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Bernard I. Bober , Judge; L.T. Case No. 01

- 18623

- CF

- 10A

.

Michael Brown, Arcadia, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallah assee, and Richard Valuntas, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ROSS

, C ONNER and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARCOS VACA,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

TRINITY, Trinity Food Service at La Paz

County Sheriff Department; et al.

,

Defendants

- Appellees,

and

UNKNOWN PARTIES, named as Does 1

- 30,

Defendant. No. 19

- 16164

D.C. No. 2:18

- cv

- 02242

- JAT

- CDB

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 6, 2020 * *

Before: BERZON, N.R. SMITH, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAY 12 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 19

- 16164

Arizona state prisoner Marcos Vaca appeals pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging v iolations of his right to

adequate food under the Fourteenth Amendment while he was a pretrial detainee

.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s

dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S. C. § 1915A.

H ayes v. Idaho Corr. Ctr. , 849 F.3d 1204, 1208 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Vaca’s action because Vaca failed to

allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim

. See Hebbe v. Pliler , 627 F.3d 338,

341

- 42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed liberally, plaintiff

must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief); s ee

also Gordon v. County of Orange , 888 F.3d 1118, 1123

- 2 5 (9th Cir. 2018) ( a

pretrial detainee’s claims arising out of the conditions of his confinement are

analyzed under the Fourteenth Amendment ); Tsao v. Desert Palace, Inc ., 698 F.3d

1128, 1138

- 39 (9th Cir. 2012) (to state a § 1983 claim against a private entity , a

plaintiff must allege that the private entity acted under color of state law and his

constitutional rights were violated as a result of a polic y or custom of the private

entity) ; Starr v. Baca , 652 F.3d 1202, 1 207 (9th Cir. 2011) ( a supervisor is liable

under § 1983 “if there exists either (1) his or her personal involvement in the

constitutional deprivation, or (2) a sufficient causal connection between the

supervisor ’ s wrongful conduct and the constitutional violation” (citation omitted)).3 19

- 16164

Vaca’s request for copies of medic al records and grievances from the La Paz

County grievances process, set forth in the opening brief, is denied.

AFFIRMED.
#### JOE M. SNIPES v. IDA M. SNIPES (Widow); VERNON P. DAVIS and wife, BARBARA S. DAVIS

No. 99A82

(Filed 13 July 1982)

APPEAL by defendants as of right pursuant to G.S. 7A-30Í2) from the decision of the Court of Appeals *(Judge Harry C. Martin,*with *Judge Clark*concurring, and *Judge Hedrick*dissenting) reported at 55 N.C. App. 498, 286 S.E. 2d 591 (1982), affirming the judgment granting plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict at the close of all the evidence and denying defendants’ motions for directed verdicts on their counterclaims by *Bailey, Judge,*filed 9 December 1980 in Superior Court, CHATHAM County.

*Barber, Holmes & McLaurin, by Edward S. Holmes, for plaintiff-appellee.*

*Gunn & Messick, by Paul S. Messick, Jr., for defendant-appellants.*

PER CURIAM.

The facts are fully and accurately stated in the Court of Appeals’ opinion. We hereby adopt the reasoning stated by the Court of Appeals and affirm its decision in all respects.

Affirmed.
#### Yonkers Savings Bank, Respondent, *v.*Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York, Appellant.

*Yonkers Savings Bank*v. *Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York,*173 App. Div. 153, affirmed.

(Argued November 15, 1918;

decided December 3, 1918.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered June 3, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court in an action to recover on a policy of liability insurance by the terms of which defendant agreed to indemnify *729plaintiff against loss arising from elevator accidents in its building. The defense was that at the time of the accident the elevator was being operated by a person under the age of eighteen employed by plaintiff in violation of a clause of the policy.. The proof showed that though the operator at the time of the accident was under the age of eighteen, he was not in the employ of plaintiff. The trial court and Appellate Division, therefore, held the clause inapplicable.

*Edward P. Mowton*for appellant.

*John F. Brennan*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan, McLaughlin and Crane-, JJ.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

DWAYNE PANNELL, Individually and on j 

Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated, 1 

! 

11 DOCUMENT i i lXECTRONICALLY FILED 

lir3oc #: 

laintiff', ! Case Management Plan I 

-against I i 07 Civ 3503(RMB) 

! 

DR. JAY'S INC., 

Defendant. 

i 

The following Case Management Plan is entered after consultation with the 

parties. This Plan is also a Rule 16 and Rule 26(f) scheduling order as required by the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure. 

(i) Joinder of additional parties by fc; >do? I 

(ii) Amend the pleadings by 

> (iii) All discovery to be expeditiously completed by (-- --TY 9 .J' 

/ / 

(iv) Consent to Proceed before Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff - Md 

Defendant - /ub 

(v) Status of settlement discussions: Pending w t vw &a 4 rl P/~(o~@ 

Sections vi through xi will be set at conference with the Court 

Vt /o: vr A -4 

(vi) Motions 

(vii) Oral Argument 

(viii) Joint Pre-Trial Order to be submitted by 

(ix) Final Pre-Trial Conference 

(x) Trial 

(xi) Other 

Case 1:07-cv-03503-RMB Document 4 Filed 06/11/2007 Page 1 of 2
SO ORDERED: New York, New York 

June 1 1,2007 

Hon. Richard M. Berman, U.S.D.J. 

Case 1:07-cv-03503-RMB Document 4 Filed 06/11/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### STATE v. DELMUS WARD LEGGETT.

(Filed 20 September, 1961.)

1. Criminal Law § 168—

Where defendant introduces evidence, only the correctness of the denial of the motion to nonsuit made at the close of all the evidence is presented on appeal.

2. Seduction § 3—

Testimony of prosecutrix as to each essential element of the crime of seduction with independent supporting evidence as to each essential element is held sufficient to be submitted to the jury.

8. Criminal Law § 161—

An assignment of error to the charge will not be sustained in the absence of prejudicial error.

Appeal by defendant from *Bone, J.,*June 26, 1961, Term of Beau-eoet.

Defendant was indicted under G.S. 14-180 for the seduction under promise of marriage of Marjorie Smith. After trial and conviction, judgment imposing a prison sentence was pronounced. Defendant appealed, assigning as error (1) the denial of his motions for judgment as in case of nonsuit, and (2) designated portions of the court’s instructions to the jury.

*Attorney General Bruton and Assistant Attorney General McGal-liard for the State.*

*Edgar J. Gurganus for defendant, appellant.*

Pee Cueiam.

Defendant offered evidence. Hence, as to defendant’s motion for judgment as in case of nonsuit, the only question is whether *359the court erred in the denial of the motion made by defendant at the close of all the evidence. G.S. 15-173.

The elements of the crime defined in G.S. 14-180 and the evidence required to support a conviction therefor are fully stated in *S. v. Smith,*223 N.C. 199, 25 S.E. 2d 619, and cases cited. Here, the prosecutrix testified as to each essential element; and, as to each essential element, there was independent supporting evidence. Hence, defendant’s said motion was properly denied.

As to defendant’s assignments of error directed to the court’s instructions, consideration thereof does not disclose error of such prejudicial nature as to justify a new trial.

We deem it unnecessary and inappropriate to set forth the evidence. Suffice to say, while defendant’s testimony, in material respects, was in conflict with that offered by the State, the factual issues were properly submitted to the jury and were resolved by the jury adversely to defendant.

No error.
#### STATE v. WASHINGTON and PARTLOW

No. 68 PC.

Case below: 30 N.C. App. 751.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 4 November 1976.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The Enstar Group, Inc. (the
"Corporation") for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the
Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, certifies that:

      (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
Corporation.

/s/ Cheryl D. Davis
---------------------------------------------
Cheryl D. Davis
Chief Financial Officer, Vice President of Corporate
Taxes, and Secretary
(Principal Financial Officer)
May 10, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to The Enstar Group, Inc. and will be retained by The Enstar Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1856 

To amend the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 

to prohibit the use of neonicotinoids in National Wildlife Refuges, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 13, 2019 

Mr. HEINRICH introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 to prohibit the use of neonicotinoids 

in National Wildlife Refuges, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protect Our Refuges 

5 Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF THE USE OF NEONICOTINOIDS IN 

7 NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—The National Wildlife Refuge 

9 System Administration Act of 1966 is amended— 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1856 IS

1 (1) by redesignating section 5 (16 U.S.C. 

2 668ee) as section 2, and moving that section so as 

3 to appear in numerical order; and 

4 (2) by inserting after section 4 (16 U.S.C. 

5 668dd) the following: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 5. PROHIBITION OF THE USE OF NEONICOTINOIDS. 

7 ‘‘No person may use a neonicotinoid in the System.’’. 

8 (b) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—The National Wild9 life Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 is amend10 ed by inserting before section 2 (as redesignated by sub11 section (a)(1)) the following: 

12 ‘‘SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

13 ‘‘This Act may be cited as the ‘National Wildlife Ref14 uge System Administration Act of 1966’.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 23.1


Consent of Independent Auditors




The Board of Directors
American Financial Holdings, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-93951, No. 333-93953 and No. 333-39886) on Form S-8 of American Financial
Holdings, Inc. of our report dated January 29, 2001, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of American Financial Holdings, Inc. and
Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the related consolidated
statements of income, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the years
in the three-year period ended December 31, 2000, which report appears in the
December 31, 2000 annual report on Form 10-K of American Financial Holdings,
Inc.

                                                /s/ KPMG


Hartford, Connecticut
March 26, 2001
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# AGENCY:

Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

# ACTION:

 Notice of public meeting.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission”) will hold a public roundtable meeting at which invited participants will discuss global markets-related issues in the financial services and commodity markets. Participants will be announced at a later date.

# DATES:

Tuesday, December 13, 2005, from 1 to 4 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC, Lobby Level Hearing Room located at Room 1000.

# STATUS:

Open.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Issued by the Commission in Washington, DC on November 30, 2005.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 05-23623 Filed 11-30-05; 12:41 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
Exhibit 32

                            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 Qorus.com,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ending  December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  the undersigned officers
of the Company  hereby  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as adopted
pursuant to ss. 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; and

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

Dated this 30th day of March 2004


/s/ Patrick J. Haynes, III
Patrick J. Haynes, III
President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Thomas C. Ratchford
Thomas C. Ratchford
Principal Accounting Officer

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
         other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
         signature that appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of
         this written  statement  required by Section 906, has been  provided to
         Qorus.com,  Inc. and will be retained by Qorus.com,  Inc. and furnished
         to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       26
#### TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH v. BARTOW

No. 14.

Case below: 38 N.C. App. 623.

Motion of defendant to dismiss plaintiffs appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 29 December 1978.
#### STATE v. KINSEY

No. 150 PC.

Case below: 17 N.C. App. 57.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 6 February 1973.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

      ( print page 6710)    
                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, February 10, 2005, 8 a.m. to February 11, 2005, 5 p.m. Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center, 9751 Washingtonian Boulevard, Gaithersburg, MD 20878 which was published in                     **Federal Register**                     on December 26, 2004, 69 FR 241.                

The amendment text was the addition of the title of the meeting: Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Practice. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: February 22, 2005.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 05-2360 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 10


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS




We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 333-34420), pertaining to the Jacada Ltd. 1999 Share Option and
Incentive Plan, the Jacada Ltd. 1996 Share Option Plan and to the Jacada Ltd.
1994 Stock Option Plan, of our report, dated January 29, 2001 with respect to
the consolidated financial statements of Jacada Ltd. included in its Annual
Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2000.





Tel Aviv, Israel
June 3, 2001






                                           /S/ KOST, FORER AND GABBAY

                                     A MEMBER OF ERNST & YOUNG INTERNATIONAL
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

James Joseph Watts, Appellant

No. 06-15-00072-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 354th District Court of 

Hunt County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 22,781). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice 

Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, James Joseph Watts, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED OCTOBER 8, 2015

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk