alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

__________________________
IN RE KEVIN PATRICK BRADY , Petitioner.

__________________________
Miscellaneous Docket No. 140

__________________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States Court of Federal Claims in case no. 12

- CV

- 0373, Judge Lawrence J. Block

.

__________________________
ON MOTION

__________________________
P ER C URIAM

.

O R D E R Kevin Patrick Brady, pro se, petitions for a writ of

man damus . We consider whether Brady’s petition should be construed as a notice of appeal. He also moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
Brady filed a complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims seeking a tax refund and other reli ef. The
court dismissed his suit for lack of subject matter jurisdi ction. Brady filed a motion for reconsideration that was denied by the Court of Federal Claims. We received this Case: 12-140 Document: 5 Page: 1 Filed: 04/10/2013IN RE KEVIN BRADY 2

petition within the time to appeal from the Court of Federal Claims' decision

. In order to appeal a judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims , the party seeking appeal must file notice that sets forth (1) the name of each party to the proceeding, (2) the judgment, order, or part, thereof being appealed, and (3) the name of the court to which the appeal is taken. Fed. R. App. P. 3(c). Brady’s petition clearly meets these requirements. In addition, his petition is timely if treated as a notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B).

Because we conclude that the petition should be co nstrued as a timely notice of appeal, mandamus relief is not appropriate. See Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Sout hern Dist. of Iowa , 490 U.S. 296, 309 (1989) (holding that a party seeking a writ bears the burden of proving that i t has no other means of attaining the relief, such as by appeal); Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Holland , 346 U.S. 379, 383 (1953) (stating “whatever may be done without the writ may not be done with it.”).
Accordingly,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT : (1) The petition for a writ of mandamus is denied b ecause the matter is treat ed as a notice of appeal. The clerk is directed to docket the case as an appeal

. (2) The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted and thus requirement of payment of the fee in the appeal is waived. Case: 12-140 Document: 5 Page: 2 Filed: 04/10/2013IN RE KEVIN BRADY 3

F OR T HE C OURT

/s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk

s 26 Case: 12-140 Document: 5 Page: 3 Filed: 04/10/2013
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. John S. TEEL, Appellant.

No. WD 40804.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Aug. 1, 1989.

Ronald F. Fisk, Public Defender, Nevada, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Christopher M. Kehr, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SHANGLER, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and ULRICH, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

The defendant John Teel appeals on instructional grounds a jury conviction, resulting in seven years imprisonment, for *517sale of a controlled substance, § 195.020, RSMo 1986.

Judgment affirmed.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We hereby  consent to the  incorporation  by reference in the  Registration
Statement on Form S-8 of FLAG Financial Corporation of our Independent Auditors'
Report  dated  January 31,  1997,  which  appears in the 1996  Annual  Report to
Stockholders  of FLAG  Financial  Corporation  incorporated  by reference in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of FLAG  Financial  Corporation  for the year ended
December 31, 1996.

/s/ Robinson, Grimes & Company, P.C.
Certified Public Accountants


Columbus, Georgia
February 17, 1998
Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in EarthLink, Inc.'s Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-30024, 333-34810,
333-39456, 333-96553, 333-108065, 333-126004, 333-133870, 333-133871), Form S-3
(Nos. 333-59456, 333-48100, 333-138600), Form S-4 (No. 333-131541), and in the related Prospectuses, of our report
dated February 26, 2008, with respect to the combined financial statements of HELIO, Inc. and HELIO LLC included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 2007.

|                                          |  | /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
|----------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------
|Los Angeles, California
February 26, 2008 |  |                      

---



QuickLinks
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






In
connection with the quarterly report of Brooklyn Federal Bancorp, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael
A. Trinidad, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
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 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.




Date:  May
17, 2010




/s/  Michael
      A. TrinidadMichael A.
      TrinidadVice President and
      Chief Financial Officer
#### William GLASGOW, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Lloyd E. EAKER, Trustee of Afshari Enterprises, Inc., Defendants/Respondents.

No. 61768.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Nov. 24, 1992.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Jan. 7, 1993.

Application to Transfer Denied Feb. 23, 1993.

Lloyd E. Eaker, Clayton, for Afshari Enterprises, Inc.

Robert J. Selsor, Suelthaus & Kaplan, P.C., Clayton, for William Glasgow.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendants appeal from the trial court’s entry of summary judgment against them in this suit by plaintiff to quiet title in land purchased by him at a tax sale. We affirm. No error of law appears and an extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 19313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10759]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service


Notice of Receipt of Applications for Permit

    The following applicants have applied for a permit to conduct 
certain activities with endangered species. This notice is provided 
pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.):

PRT-814235

Applicant: David Zellmer, Libertyville, IL.

    The applicant requests a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy 
of one male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus dorcas) culled from a captive 
herd maintained under the management program of the Republic of South 
Africa, for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species.

PRT-814091

Applicant: Oliver London, Golden Valley, MN.

    The applicant requests a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy 
of one male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus dorcas) culled from a captive 
herd maintained by African Bush Safaris for the purpose of enhancement 
of the survival of the species.

PRT-814097

Applicant: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM.

    The applicant requests a permit to import blood samples collected 
from wild caught Galapagos penguins (Spheniscus mendicules) in the 
Galapagos Islands, for the purpose of scientific research.

PRT-814085

 Applicant: The Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL.

    The applicant requests a permit to import 1 weasel lemur (Lepilemur 
ruficaudatus), 10 mouse lemurs (Microcebus murinus), 1 mouse lemur 
(Microcebus myoxinus), and 2 mouse lemurs (Microcebus spp.), dead wild 
caught and salvaged specimens from the Department of Water and Forests, 
Madagascar, for the purpose of scientific research.
    Written data or comments should be submitted to the Director, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Management Authority, 4401 North 
Fairfax Drive, Room 430, Arlington, Virginia 22203 and must be received 
by the Director within 30 days of the date of this publication.
    Documents and other information submitted with these applications 
are available for review, subject to the requirements of the Privacy 
Act and Freedom of Information Act, by any party who submits a written 
request for a copy of such documents to the following office within 30 
days of the date of publication of this notice: U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Office of Management Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 
430, Arlington, Virginia 22203. Phone: (703/358-2104); FAX: (703/358-
2281).

    Dated: April 26, 1996.
Mary Ellen Amtower,
Acting Chief, Branch of Permits, Office of Management Authority.
[FR Doc. 96-10759 Filed 4-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 110 (Thursday, June 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 30935]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12187]


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

FARM CREDIT SYSTEM INSURANCE CORPORATION


Regular Meeting; Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation Board

AGENCY: Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation.

ACTION: Notice, regular meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, in accordance with the provisions of 
Article VI of the Bylaws of the Farm Credit System Insurance 
Corporation (FCSIC), of a forthcoming regular meeting of the Board that 
a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of FCSIC will be held.

DATES: June 17, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. EDT, until such time as the Board 
may conclude its business. Note: Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, we 
will conduct the board meeting virtually. If you would like to observe 
the open portion of the virtual meeting, see instructions below for 
board meeting visitors.

ADDRESSES: To observe the open portion of the virtual meeting, go to 
FCSIC.gov, select ``News & Events,'' then ``Board Meetings.'' There you 
will find a description of the meeting and ``Instructions for board 
meeting visitors.'' See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further 
information about attendance requests.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Aultman, Secretary to the Board 
of the Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation, (703) 883-4009. TTY is 
(703) 883-4056.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Parts of this meeting of the Board will be 
open to the public and parts will be closed. If you wish to observe the 
open portion, follow the instructions above in the Addresses section at 
least 24 hours before the meeting. Please note that this meeting begins 
at 10:00 a.m. EDT with a session that is closed to the public. You may 
join this meeting at 10:45 a.m. EDT. We will begin the open session 
promptly at 11:00 a.m. EDT.
    Assistance: If you need assistance for accessibility reasons or if 
you have any questions, contact Dale Aultman, Secretary to the Farm 
Credit Administration Board, at (703) 883-4009. The matters to be 
considered at the meeting are as follows:

A. Closed Session
    <bullet> Report on Insurance Risk/Premium Risk Factors
B. Approval of Minutes
    <bullet> March 18, 2021
C. Quarterly Business Reports
    <bullet> FCSIC Financial Reports
    <bullet> Report on Insured Obligations
    <bullet> Report on Annual Performance Plan
D. New Business
    <bullet> Mid-Year Review of Insurance Premium Rates

    Dated: June 7, 2021.
Dale Aultman,
Secretary, Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2021-12187 Filed 6-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
#### Charles Dale WAGNER, Appellant, v. MO. HIGHWAY & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, Respondent.

No. WD 41348.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 23, 1989.

Jeremiah D. Finnegan, Kansas City, for appellant.

Rich Tiemeyer, Chief Counsel, Missouri Highway & Transp. Com’n, Thomas W. Ry-nard, Asst. Counsel, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before BERREY, P.J., and MANFORD and NUGENT, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Direct appeal from the entry of summary judgment.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
#### In re the Interests of M.N.M. and M.M. M.M., Appellant, v. MISSOURI DIVISION OF FAMILY SERVICES, et al. Respondents.

No. WD 51669.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Dec. 17, 1996.

Seth D. Shumaker, Kirksville, for Appellant.

Wallace Trosen, Kirksville, for Respondents DFS and Waddle.

Paul Rick Jackson, Kirksville, for Guardian ad Litem.

Before LOWENSTEIN, P.J., and BERREY and EDWIN H. SMITH, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Mother appeals from the judgment of the juvenile court terminating her parental rights under § 211.447.2, RSMo 1994.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5712 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5712

                     One Hundred Eighteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
         the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
220 Fremont Street in Kiel, Wisconsin, as the ``Trooper Trevor J. Casper 
                         Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. TROOPER TREVOR J. CASPER POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 220 Fremont Street in Kiel, Wisconsin, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Trooper Trevor J. Casper Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Trooper 
Trevor J. Casper Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6651

SGRE, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
EXHIBIT 99(a)(2)

                             Management's Assertion


As of and for the year ended December 31, 2004, CitiFinancial Mortgage Company,
Inc. complied in all material respects with the minimum servicing standards set
forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single
Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers. The portfolios covered by this
representation include CitiFinancial Mortgage Securities Inc. REMIC Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2002-1, 2003-1, 2003-2, 2003-3, 2003-4 and 2004-1. As of
and for this same period, CitiFinancial Mortgage Company, Inc. had in effect a
fidelity bond and errors and omissions policy in the amount of $50,000,000.


                                                /s/ James Miller
                                            ---------------------------
                                                           James Miller
                                                Managing Director - EVP

                                                    March 2, 2005
                                            ---------------------------
                                                                   Date
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 19325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10800]



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


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Special Emphasis Panel in Design, Manufacture, and Industrial 
Innovation; 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 Design, Manufacture, and 
Industrial Innovation-(1194).
    Date and Time: May 21, 1996, 8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
    Place: Room 530, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. Christina Gabriel, Program Director, (703) 
306-1330, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, 
Arlington, VA 22230.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to the NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate Management of Technological 
Innovation (MOTI) proposals as part of the selection process for 
awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
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 USC 552b(c) (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: April 26, 1996.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 96-10800 Filed 4-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
#### Alan R. Chester, Respondent, v Kelly Lumber Company, Inc., et al., Defendants, and Santos Construction Corporation, Appellant. (And Two Third-Party Actions.)

Levine, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Best, J.), entered November 15, 1989 in Fulton County, which denied defendant Santos Construction Corporation’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims against it.

This personal injury action arises out of a construction site accident which occurred as plaintiff and other workers were in the process of securing roof trusses to the tops of the walls of the building under construction. Defendant Santos Construction Corporation (hereinafter Santos) was in charge of operating the crane used to lift each truss up to the top of the outer walls.

Plaintiff alleges that just prior to the accident, a "toe line” hanging down from the material then being lifted by the crane became entangled in the webbing of the last truss installed at a point about half way across the width of the building. Plaintiff then walked out on the bottom section of the truss to untangle the line when the truss broke and plaintiff fell to the ground.

*929Plaintiff commenced this action against Santos and other contractors and the owner of the construction site. Following joinder of issue and pretrial discovery, Santos moved for summary judgment on the ground that there was no negligence on its part and that nothing it did was a proximate cause of the accident. In support of its motion, Santos relied on portions of plaintiff’s testimony at an examination before trial in which he states that just after the accident he discovered that one of two gussets was missing from an end of the truss that had broken.

In opposition to the motion, plaintiff submitted an engineering expert’s affidavit which stated that structural damage to the truss could occur as a result of the force exerted by the crane after the toe line became entangled. In a later affidavit, the expert unequivocally stated that he believed such structural damage occurred and that it was a proximate cause of the accident. Supreme Court denied the motion for summary judgment and this appeal by Santos ensued.

In our view, the motion for summary judgment was properly denied. Plaintiffs expert was undoubtedly aware of the missing gusset based upon his averment that he had reviewed an affidavit by plaintiff which had made specific reference to the missing gusset. In spite of this, however, the expert opined that the entanglement of the toé line with the truss and the force exerted by the crane in still moving its load weakened the structural integrity of the truss and contributed to its collapse and the accident which followed. This evidence was clearly sufficient to rebut Santos’ contention that the missing gusset was the sole proximate cause of the accident as a matter of law *(see, Badillo v Nova Clutch & Brake,*137 AD2d 573, 575).

Order affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.
exv10w1



 





Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE

TO THE

THE CLOROX COMPANY

2005 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN




     The Board of Directors of The Clorox Company has amended The Clorox Company 2005 Stock
Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) as follows:




	 	1.	 	Effective September 19, 2006, the definition of “Fair Market Value” in the
Glossary of Defined Terms of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting such definition and
replacing it with the following:
	 
	 	 	 	“Fair Market Value” means, as of any date, the value of a Share determined
as follows:
	 
	 	 	 	(a) Where there exists a public market for the Share, the Fair Market Value shall be
(A) the closing sales price for a Share on the date of the determination (or, if no
sales were reported on that date, on the last trading date on which sales were
reported) on the New York Stock Exchange, the NASDAQ National Market or the
principal securities exchange on which the Share is listed for trading, whichever is
applicable, or (B) if the Share is not traded on any such exchange or national
market system, the average of the closing bid and asked prices of a Share on the
NASDAQ Small Cap Market, in each case, as reported in The Wall Street Journal or
such other source as the Committee deems reliable; or
	 
	 	 	 	(b)In the absence of an established market of the type described above, for the
Share, the Fair Market Value thereof shall be determined by the Committee in good
faith, and such determination shall be conclusive and binding on all persons.
	 
	 	2.	 	Except as expressly herein amended, the provisions of the Plan shall remain in
full force and effect.





     All provisions of the Plan not specifically mentioned in this Amendment shall be considered
modified to the extent necessary to be consistent with the changes made in this Amendment.