alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILD EQUITY INSTITUTE, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 15-17502

D.C. No. 4:15-cv-02461-PJH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Phyllis J. Hamilton, Chief Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted February 14, 2017

San Francisco, California

Before: W. FLETCHER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and GORDON,**

District Judge.

 

Wild Equity filed this suit claiming that the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) must reinitiate Endangered Species Act consultation with the Fish

FILED

AUG 28 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The Honorable Andrew P. Gordon, United States District Judge for

the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.
and Wildlife Service about a 2001 permit because 1) new information shows the

power plant authorized under the permit is causing greater harm to protected

species than understood in 2001, and 2) “discretionary Federal involvement or

control over [an agency] action has been retained or is authorized by law.” 50

C.F.R. § 402.16; see also 16 U.S.C. § 1536(a)(2).

The district court dismissed this case on the ground that there is no federal

agency action on which the EPA could consult—the 2001 permit expired before

construction was complete and now has no operative effect. Wild Equity’s

position on appeal is that as long as there was agency action in the past and the

agency has some discretion over the subject matter of that agency action, the

conditions for reinitiation are met. No new or ongoing agency action is required.

The district court is correct. Although the 2001 permit was “agency action”

at the time of its issuance, its expiration severed any connection to subsequent

plant operation. The current plant operation cannot be plausibly described as

“authorized . . . by” the expired 2001 permit. 16 U.S.C. § 1536(a)(2). Wild Equity

offers no viable statutory interpretation or case law to bridge that gap.

Because the plant was being operated without a valid permit, the EPA

brought a civil enforcement suit that was settled with a consent decree in 2011,

allowing the plant to remain in operation. Any argument that this consent decree

2
constitutes agency action is waived by Wild Equity’s statement that it “does not

rely on the consent decree as a triggering event” requiring EPA to reinitiate

consultation. See United States v. Laurienti, 611 F.3d 530, 543 (9th Cir. 2010).

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

3
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Kevin W. BAKER, Appellant.

No. WD 47030.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

March 15, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 3, 1994.

Susan L. Hogan, Appellate Defender, Office of State Public Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joanne E. Beal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before ULRICH, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from conviction of murder in the second degree, § 565.021.1(1), RSMo 1986, and armed criminal action, § 571.015, RSMo 1986, and from concurrent sentences of imprisonment for ten and three years.

Judgment affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.-25(b).
EX-10.5



 







    Exhibit 10.5



 




    AMENDMENT
    NO. 1

    TO

    BRUSH ENGINEERED MATERIALS INC.

    2006 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR EQUITY PLAN



 




    Recitals



 



    WHEREAS, Brush Engineered Materials Inc. (the
    “Company”) has adopted the Brush Engineered Materials
    Inc. 2006 Non-employee Director Equity Plan (the
    “Plan”).



 



    WHEREAS, the Company now desires to amend the Plan (this
    “Amendment No. 1”) to increase the minimum value
    of a participant account requiring distribution in the form of
    an immediate lump sum payment (regardless of whether a
    participant has elected installment payments) in order to create
    uniformity with the Company’s 1992 Deferred Compensation
    Plan for Non-employee Directors and 2005 Deferred Compensation
    Plan for Non-employee Directors.



 



    WHEREAS, the Governance and Organization Committee (formerly
    named the Governance Committee) of the Board of Directors of the
    Company has approved this Amendment No. 1 pursuant to
    Section 12 of the Plan.



 




    Amendment



 



    NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended by this Amendment
    No. 1, effective as of January 1, 2007, as follows:



 



    1. Section 8(d)(i) of the Plan is hereby amended by
    changing “$10,000” to “$17,500”.



 



    2. Except as amended by this Amendment No. 1, the Plan
    shall remain in full force and effect.



 



    /s/ Michael C. Hasychak












    Michael C. Hasychak









    Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary



 



    Dated: September 12, 2006




    

    31
EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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  HeavenExpress.com, Inc. (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-KSB for the year ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 15, 2003 (the "Report"), Saundra
Sharpe,  as 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) 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 /  Saundra Sharpe
                                   ---------------------
                                   Saundra Sharpe
                                   Chief Executive Officer
                                   April 15, 2003
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

March 8, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 128161 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 128161 

 COA: 250000 

Oakland CC: 02-183044-FH 

RAYMOND A. MCCULLER,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On February 20, 2007, the United States Supreme Court entered an order that 

vacated this Court's opinion in this case, and remanded this case to this Court for further 

consideration in light of Cunningham v California, 549 US ___; 127 S Ct 856; 166 L Ed 

2d 856 (2007). On order of the Court, this case shall be argued and submitted to the 

Court together with the cases of People v Burns (Docket No. 131898), and People v 

Harper (Docket No. 130988), at such future session of the Court as the cases are ready 

for submission. 

The parties shall file supplemental briefs by April 4, 2007, addressing the effect, if 

any, of Cunningham v California on the prison sentence imposed in this case, and on this 

Court's vacated opinion in this case, People v McCuller, 475 Mich 176 (2006). The 

Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of 

Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae by April 4, 2007. Other persons or 

groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the 

Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae by April 4, 2007. 

d0307 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

March 8, 2007 

 Clerk
**Exhibit
        32.1**
 
 **Certification
        Of Periodic Financial Report**
 **(Section
        906 Certification)**
   
 Pursuant
        to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350),
        the
        undersigned officers of Discovery Bancorp (the “Company”), hereby certify that,
        to their knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period
        ended September 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of
        Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
        1934,
        as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and that the information contained in the Report
        fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
        of operations of the Company.
 
  Date:
                  November 14, 2006
                
                /s/
                  James P. Kelley, IIJames
                  P. Kelley, II, Chief Executive OfficerDate:
                  November 14, 2006
                
                /s/
                  Martin McNabbMartin
                  McNabb, Chief Financial Officer
  The
        foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906
        of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) and shall not be deemed
        to
        be “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise
        subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed to be
        incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933
        or the
        Exchange Act.
Lee Roy Brown #1027084

3001 S. Emily Drive

McConnell Unit

Beeville, Texas 78102

CoH.Wg-OZ ,OLf

March 12, 2015

RE: Trial CT NO: WOl-00206

Dear Sir or Ma'am,

Could I please have a copy of the court docket concerning

the Trial CT NO: WOl-00206. "I Wave included a SASE to expedite

the process.

RECEIVED IN

COURT Of" rPMNAL APPFALS

13 '""5

elAlcosta Cierh

Sincerely,

Lee/ROy Brawn #1027084
IV 

House Calendar No. 28 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 257 

[Report No. 111–40] 

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 18, 2009 

Ms. PINGREE of Maine, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 

resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules. 

1 Resolved, That it shall be in order at any time on 

2 the legislative day of March 19, 2009, for the Speaker to 

3 entertain motions that the House suspend the rules relat4 ing to a measure addressing excessive compensation paid 

5 to employees of corporations in which the Federal govern6 ment has a significant interest. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

House Calendar No. 28 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 257 

[Report No. 111–40] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend 

the rules. 

MARCH 18, 2009 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 28, 2024

NO. 03

- 24

- 00043

- CV

Amy Wilson , Appellant

v.

8900 Austin, LLC d/b/a Orbit Apartments , Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES SMITH AND THEOFANIS

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE THEOFANIS

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on December 21, 2023 . Having

reviewed the record , the Court holds that Amy Wilson has not prosecuted her appeal and did not

comply with a notice from the C lerk of this C ourt

. Therefore, th e Court dismis ses the appeal for

want of prosecution. Because appellant is indigent and u nable to pay costs, no adjudica t i on of

costs is made.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 110 (Thursday, June 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 30964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12142]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel; Understanding and Reducing Cardiovascular 
Disease in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.
    Date: July 15, 2021.
    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6705 Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, MD 20817 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Susan Wohler Sunnarborg, Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, 
Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6705 
Rockledge Drive, Room 208-Z, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 827-7987, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#20535553414e0e53554e4e4152424f5247604e49480e474f56"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c4b7b1b7a5aaeab7b1aaaaa5b6a6abb6a384aaadaceaa3abb2">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 4, 2021.
David W. Freeman,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-12142 Filed 6-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 10.25

SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT

This
SECOND AMENDMENT is made as of the 29thday of November, 2006 (the Effective Date), between H. SHANE
HAMMOND(hereinafter referred to as Employee) and TRX, INC., a Georgia corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Company).

WHEREAS, Employee and the Company previously entered into that certain Employment Contract dated as of December 1, 2003, as amended on April 28, 2005 (the Employment Contract); and

WHEREAS, Employee and the Company desire to further amend certain terms and provisions of the Employment Contract;

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten and no/100 Dollars ($10.00) in hand paid each to the other and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Employee and the Company hereby agree to amend the Employment Contract as follows:



| | 1. | In accordance with Section 6(e) of the Employment Contract, the parties agree that the Term is extended for an additional two year period through and until December 1,
2008.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Except as specifically amended herein, the Employment Contract (as previously amended) shall remain in full force and effect.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Second Amendment as of the date first above written.



EMPLOYEE:/s/ H. Shane HammondH. Shane HammondCOMPANY:TRX, INC.By:

/s/ Norwood H. Davis, III


Printed Name:

Norwood H. Davis, III


Title:

President and CEO




1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6430

ADARIUS QUANTE DENNIS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN CARTLEDGE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. 

(0:14-cv-04637-TMC)

Submitted: September 20, 2016 Decided: September 23, 2016

Before KING, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Adarius Quante Dennis, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, James Anthony Mabry, 

Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Adarius Quante Dennis seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. We 

order a limited remand. 

“[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case 

is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 

205, 214 (2007). The notice of appeal must be filed within 30 

days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from. Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). The district court may extend the time 

to file a notice of appeal if “a party so moves no later than 30 

days after the time prescribed by . . . Rule 4(a) expires,” and 

the party shows excusable neglect or good cause. Fed. R. App. 

P. 4(a)(5)(A).

The district court’s order was entered on February 2, 2016. 

Dennis had until March 3, 2016 to timely file his notice of 

appeal, and the 30-day excusable neglect period ended on April 

4, 2016. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A), 26(a)(1)(C). Dennis’ 

notice of appeal was filed within the 30-day excusable neglect 

period. He stated reasons for his delay and arguably requested 

an extension of the period to file the notice of appeal. 

Accordingly, we remand the case to the district court for 

the limited purpose of allowing the court to determine whether 
3

an extension is warranted. The record, as supplemented, will 

then be returned to this court for further consideration.

REMANDED
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5979 

To require each enterprise to include on the Uniform Residential Loan Application a disclaimer to increase awareness of the direct and guaranteed 

home loan programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 18, 2023 

Ms. DE LA CRUZ (for herself, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. CRENSHAW, Mr. 

POSEY, Mr. OGLES, Mr. GOODEN of Texas, Mr. MOORE of Alabama, and 

Mr. SESSIONS) introduced the following bill 

OCTOBER 25, 2023 

Referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To require each enterprise to include on the Uniform Residential Loan Application a disclaimer to increase awareness of the direct and guaranteed home loan programs 

of the Department of Veterans Affairs, 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 ‘‘VA Home Loan Aware5 ness Act of 2023’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 5979 IH

1 SEC. 2. MILITARY SERVICE QUESTION. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subpart A of part 2 of the Fed3 eral Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness 

4 Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4541 et seq.) is amended by add5 ing at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 1329. UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL LOAN APPLICATION. 

7 ‘‘Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment 

8 of this section, the Director shall, by regulation or order, 

9 require each enterprise to include a disclaimer below the 

10 military service question on the form known as the Uni11 form Residential Loan Application stating, ‘If yes, you 

12 may qualify for a VA Home Loan. Consult your lender 

13 regarding eligibility.’.’’. 

14 (b) GAO STUDY.—Not later than 18 months after 

15 the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General 

16 of the United States shall conduct a study and submit to 

17 Congress a report on whether or not less than 80 percent 

18 of lenders using the Uniform Residential Loan Application 

19 have included on that form the disclaimer required under 

20 section 1329 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Finan21 cial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, as added by sub22 section (a). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
EX-32
SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF PATRICK A. GALLIHER AND ARTHUR DE JOYA

                      SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

In connection with the quarterly report of RMD Technologies, Inc.
("Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended August 31, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to their 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: October 25, 2005                By: /s/  Patrtick A. Galliher
                                       Patrick A. Galliher, President




Dated: October 25, 2005                By: /s/  Arthur de Joya
                                       Arthur de Joya
                                       Chief Financial Officer
                                       (principal financial officer)
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 United States Code Section 1350,

As adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



The undersigned hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2005 of ASG Consolidated LLC (the
Company) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/    BERNT O. BODALName:

Bernt O. BodalTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerDate:

May 16, 2005




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to ASG Consolidated LLC and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 7386

LARRY JAMES TYLER , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. JAMES BOGLE, SR, Esq; JAMES K. FALK , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence

. Mary G. Lewis , District Judge. ( 4:17

- cv
- 01251

- MGL )

Submitted : May 24, 2018 Decided: May 29, 2018

Before NIEMEYER , MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Larry James Tyler , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Larry James Tyler appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation
of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court , grant Tyler’s

mot ion to file a supplemental brief, and deny as moot his Fed. R. App. P. 24(c) motion for the appeal to be heard on the original record

. Tyler v. Bogle , No. 4:17

- cv
- 01251

- MGL (D.S.C. Oct. 5, 2017) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED