alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### RHEA PENLAND, Trading as BURNSVILLE CONSTRUCTION CO., v. RED HILL METHODIST CHURCH and RABURN YELTON, W. B. GREENE, RUSSELL WOODY, H. S. GORTNEY, WILLARD YOUNG, DONT WHITSON, WALTER GARLAND and NATHAN YELTON, Trustees and Members of the Building Committee of RED HILL METHODIST CHURCH.

(Filed 19 March, 1947.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Phillips, J.,*at September Term, 1946, of Mitchell.

Affirmed.

*700Civil action to recover balance alleged to be due on contract to erect a cburcb building for defendants in which the defendants plead a counterclaim for damages for breach of contract, heard on report of referee.

*McBee & McBee and Watson, Fonts <& Watson for plaintiff, appellant.*

*W. G. Berry and Charles Hutchins for defendants, appellees.*

Per Curiam.

The contract is admitted. Defendants plead breach thereof and resulting damages for which they pray judgment. Hence the issues as raised by the pleadings are those raised by the further answer and counterclaim. Plaintiff failed to tender the issues thus raised and to demand jury trial thereon. *Booker v. Highlands,*198 N. C., 282, 151 S. E., 635; *Brown v. Clement Co.,*217 N. C., 47, 6 S. E. (2d), 842. Hence trial by jury was waived.

The court below found that the evidence sustained the findings made by the referee, adopted them as its own, and rendered judgment for defendants on their counterclaim in the amount found to be due. A careful examination of the record fails to disclose error therein.

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

CHERI ANN LEINBERGER, MATTHEW S. LEINBERGER, DANIEL P. SENECA, KATHLEEN A. SENECA AND WILLIAM J. NECKER,

Petitioners

v.

ANTHONY G. STELLAR, AS TRUSTEE OF THE DEBORAH E. STELLAR REVOCABLE TRUST,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 745 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Unpublished Memorandum Opinion and Order of the Commonwealth Court at No. 1620 CD 2017 entered on October 11, 2018, affirming the Order of the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas at No. 2015

- C

- 3839 entered on November 10, 2017

ORDER

PER CURIAM Decided: May 24, 2019

AND NOW , this 24 th day of May, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED , the Commonwealth Court’s order is VACATED , and this matter is remanded

for proceedings consistent with this Court’s decision in Slice of Life, LLC v. Hamilton Twp.

Zoning Hearing Bd.

, ___ A.3d ___, 2019 WL 1870562 (Pa. Apr. 26, 2019)

.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5084 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

1106 Main Street in Bastrop, Texas, as the ‘‘Sergeant Major Billy 

D. Waugh Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 28, 2023 

Mr. MCCAUL (for himself, Mr. ELLZEY, Mr. CRENSHAW, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. 

BABIN, Mr. ARRINGTON, Mr. JACKSON of Texas, Mr. WILLIAMS of 

Texas, Ms. CROCKETT, Mr. FALLON, Ms. GRANGER, Ms. VAN DUYNE, 

Mr. VEASEY, Mr. ALLRED, Mr. TONY GONZALES of Texas, Mr. SELF, 

Mr. NEHLS, Mr. GOODEN of Texas, Mr. MORAN, and Mr. CARTER of 

Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1106 Main Street in Bastrop, Texas, as the 

‘‘Sergeant Major Billy D. Waugh Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SERGEANT MAJOR BILLY D. WAUGH POST OF4 FICE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 1106 Main Street in Bastrop, 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5084 IH

1 Texas, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sergeant 

2 Major Billy D. Waugh Post Office’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sergeant Major Billy 

7 D. Waugh Post Office’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 February 3, 2015

d0126

Order 

Clerk

February 3, 2015

149334(24)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 149334

COA: 317960

Saginaw CC: 10-034334-FH

ROBERT LEE ESSEX, Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s November 

25, 2014 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order 

was entered erroneously.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 68 (Monday, April 10, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18030]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8756]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Public Land Order 7131

[NV-930-1430-01; NV-57922]


Withdrawal of Public Land to the United States Air Force; Nevada

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Public Land Order.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This order withdraws 3,972.04 acres of public land from 
surface entry, mining, and mineral leasing until November 6, 2001, for 
the United States Air Force to provide a safety and security buffer 
between public land administered by the Bureau of Land Management and 
withdrawn land under the jurisdiction of the Nellis Air Force Range.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 7, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Samuelson, BLM Nevada State 
Office, P.O. Box 12000, Reno, Nevada 89520, (702) 785-6507.
    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior 
by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 
43 U.S.C. 1714 (1988), it is ordered as follows:
    1. Subject to valid existing rights, the following described public 
land is hereby withdrawn from settlement, sale, location, or entry 
under the general land laws, including the United States mining laws 
(30 U.S.C. Ch. 2 (1988)), and from leasing under the mineral leasing 
laws, to provide a safety and security buffer for the United States Air 
Force at Nellis Range:

Mount Diablo Meridian

T. 6 S., R. 56 E., unsurveyed
    Sec. 25;
    Sec. 36.
T. 7 S., R. 56 E., unsurveyed
    Sec. 1;
    Sec. 13, W\1/2\;
    Sec. 24, NW\1/4\.
T. 6 S., R. 57 E.,
    Sec. 30, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and E\1/2\W\1/2\;
    Sec. 31, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and E\1/2\W\1/2\, E\1/2\.
T. 7 S., R 57 E.,
    Sec. 6, lots 1 to 7, inclusive, S\1/2\NE\1/4\, SE\1/4\NW\1/4\, 
E\1/2\SW\1/4\, and SE\1/4\.

    The area described contains 3,972.04 acres in Lincoln County.

    2. This withdrawal will expire on November 6, 2001, unless, as a 
result of a review conducted before the expiration date pursuant to 
Section 204(f) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 
43 U.S.C. 1714(f) (1988), the Secretary determines that the withdrawal 
shall be extended.
Bob Armstrong,
Assistant Secretary of the Interior
[FR Doc. 95-8756 Filed 4-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MELINDA GABRIELLA VALENZUELA,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

D. W. MASOON; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 17

- 17406

D.C. No. 4:17

- cv

- 00441

- FRZ

PSOT

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona Frank R. Zapata, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 10, 2018 **

Before: CANBY, W. FLETCHER, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Melinda Gabriella Valenzuela appeals pro se from the

district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging claims arising under Title

II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) related to her conditions of

confinement . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S. C. § 1291. We review d e novo a

* 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

JUL 13 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 17406

dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Hamilton v. Brown , 630 F.3d 889, 892 (9th

Cir. 2011). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record, Mahoney v.

Sessions , 871 F.3d 873, 877 (9th Cir. 2017), and w e affirm.

The distri ct court properly dismissed Valenzuela’s claims against defendants

in their individual capacities because as individuals, they are not liable under the

ADA. See Lovell v. Chandler , 303 F.3d 1039, 1052 (9th Cir. 2002) (“The ADA

applies only to public entit ies[.]”).

Dismissal of Valenzuela’s ADA claim against defendant Corizon was proper

because Valenzuela 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 to be liberally construed, a plaintiff still must present factual allegations

sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief); Simmons v. Navajo C ounty , Ariz

. ,

609 F.3d 1011, 1021 (9th Cir. 2010) ( elements of a Title II ADA claim )

.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n .2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Valenzuela’s motions to compel (Docket Entry Nos. 9 and 11) are denied.

AFFIRMED

.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 67 (Friday, April 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 17827]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8557]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Special Emphasis Panel in Mathematical Sciences; Notice of 
Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Mathematical Sciences (1204).
    Dates and Times: April 24-25, 1995; 8:30 a.m. til 5 p.m.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 
1060, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. Alvin Thaler, National Science Foundation, 
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone: (703) 306-
1880.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to National Science Foundation for 
financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals concerning the Grants 
for Scientific Computing Research Environments for the Mathematical 
Sciences (SCREMS), as part of the selection process for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed included 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 5523b(c) (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: April 3, 1995.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-8557 Filed 4-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5127 

To reduce appointment wait times for certain nonimmigrant visas known 

as visitor visas, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 1, 2023 

Ms. SALAZAR (for herself, Mrs. LEE of Nevada, Mrs. MILLER of West Virginia, Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI, Mr. SWALWELL, Ms. TITUS, Ms. NORTON, 

Mr. KIM of New Jersey, Mr. GOLDMAN of New York, Mrs. RADEWAGEN, 

Ms. TOKUDA, Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. RYAN, Ms. BLUNT ROCHESTER, Mr. 

CASE, Mr. CARSON, Mr. TRONE, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Ms. CLARKE of New 

York, Mrs. GONZA ́LEZ-COLO ́N, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Ms. 

MACE, Mr. WEBSTER of Florida, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, and Mrs. 

CHERFILUS-MCCORMICK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To reduce appointment wait times for certain nonimmigrant 

visas known as visitor visas, 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 ‘‘Visitor Visa Wait Time 

5 Reduction Act’’. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5127 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPORT AND REASSIGNMENT OF PERSONNEL FOR 

2 EXCESSIVE VISITOR VISA WAIT TIMES. 

3 (a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 90 days 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

5 of State shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

6 of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 

7 Foreign Relations of the Senate a report that includes— 

8 (1) a list of each diplomatic and consular post 

9 at which the average waiting period, beginning on 

10 the date an individual submits an application for a 

11 nonimmigrant visa under section 101(a)(15)(B) of 

12 the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 

13 1101) (commonly referred to as a ‘‘visitor visa’’) and 

14 the date such individual is granted an interview for 

15 such a visa, exceeds 100 days; and 

16 (2) an explanation of the concrete steps taken 

17 at each such post in order to reduce such average 

18 waiting period. 

19 (b) REASSIGNMENT OF PERSONNEL.—With respect 

20 to any diplomatic or consular posts at which the average 

21 waiting period described in subsection (a)(1) exceeds 300 

22 days, the Secretary of State shall, as appropriate, tempo23 rarily reassign appropriate personnel of the Department 

24 of State to directly assist consular staff at such posts in 

25 order to reduce such average waiting period. 

Æ 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION FURNISHED 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 Tufco Technologies, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company. Date: December 29, 2004
    
    /s/ Louis LeCalsey, IIILouis LeCalsey, IIIPresident and Chief Executive Officer
*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.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-40250

Summary Calendar

WILLIAM P. MAHER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

(C-95-CV-406)

August 8, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, WIENER and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

POLITZ, Chief Judge:*

William P. Maher, a pro se litigant, appeals an adverse summary judgment

in his employment discrimination complaint against the Texas Department of

Transportation. For the reasons assigned we vacate and remand.
1

 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1).

2

 29 U.S.C. § 626(e).

3 Martin v. Demma, 831 F.2d 69, 71 (5th Cir. 1987) (per curiam).

4 Ynclan v. Department of the Air Force, 943 F.2d 1388 (5th Cir. 1991); Hernandez

v. Aldridge, 902 F.2d 386 (5th Cir. 1990); Martin.

2

The district court concluded that Maher failed to file a complaint within 90

days of receiving an EEOC right to sue letter, as required by Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 19641and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.2 Maher

received a right to sue letter on March 30, 1995. On June 14, 1995 he filed an

application to proceed in forma pauperis, simultaneously submitting to the clerk of

the district court his complaint alleging discrimination on the basis ofsex, age, and

national origin. The pleading was stamped that date as “Received.” On August 11,

1995 the request for IFP was granted and the complaint was stamped “filed.”

The district court apparently considered Maher’s complaint as filed on

August 11. We have observed that “[c]lerical delay in the formal filing of [an] in

forma pauperis complaint should not affect the operative event, that is, the receipt

of the complaint by the court.”3 In cases with similar facts, we have concluded that

equity cannot permit a plaintiff to be prejudiced by the administrative delay

inherent in the nature of such suits.4

In the instant case, the district court denied defendant’sRule 12(b)(6) motion
3

to dismiss during a status conference on May 31, 1996. The court’s notes from the

conference reflect that Maher’s “complaint was timely filed” and that Maher was

ordered “to re-file a complaint more clearly stating his allegations” within 10 days.

Based on the record before us we cannot determine why the district court later

concluded that the complaint was not timely despite its submission on the day the

IFP application wasfiled, well within the requisite 90 daysfrom receipt of the right

to sue letter.

We therefore VACATE the order of the district court and REMAND for a

reexamination to determine whether Maher’s complaint wassubmitted to the clerk

for filing within the statutory time period. Maher’s motion to supplement the

record on appeal is DENIED as moot.
**Exhibit 23**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board ofDirectors and Stockholders 

Destination Maternity Corporation: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-59309, 333-12321, 333-27611 and 333-90110) and registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos.33-64580, 33-89726, 333-2404, 333-3480, 333-59529, 333-57766, 333-112158 and 333-137136) of Destination Maternity Corporation (formerly Mothers Work, Inc.) of our reports dated December 14, 2009, with respect to the consolidated balance sheetsof Destination Maternity Corporation and subsidiaries as of September 30, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive loss and cash flows for each of the years in thethree-year period ended September 30, 2009, and the related financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2009, which reports appear in the September 30, 2009annual report on Form 10-K of Destination Maternity Corporation. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

December 14, 2009
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 Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of GLOBAL EPOINT, INC. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 13, 2004 (the Report), I, Toresa Lou, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|April 29, 2004         
|                       
|/s/    TORESA LOU      
|                       
|Toresa Lou             
|Chief Executive Officer



In connection with Amendment No. 1 to
the Annual Report of GLOBAL EPOINT, INC. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 13, 2004 (the Report), I, John Pan, Chief Financial
Officer and Chairman of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|April 29, 2004                      
|                                    
|/s/    JOHN PAN                     
|                                    
|John Pan                            
|Chief Financial Officer and Chairman



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
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



-18-
Exhibit 32.1



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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Universal Capital Management, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ending July 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael D. Queen, Principal Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my 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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/ Michael D. Queen

Michael D. Queen,

Principal Executive Officer

September 14, 2010