alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6942

JESSE TRUJILLO,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

S. K. YOUNG, Warden,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District

Judge. (CA-02-1083-7)

Submitted: August 28, 2003 Decided: September 10, 2003

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jesse Trujillo, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Foster Barr, OFFICE OF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Jesse Trujillo appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Trujillo v. Young, No. CA02-1083-7 (W.D. Va. June 5, 2003). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Christopher F. HEAVNER, Appellant.

No. WD 50862.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Dec. 5, 1995.

Ellen H. Flottman, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen, Jefferson City, Deborah Bell Yates, Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for respondent.

Before FENNER, C.J., P.J., and ULRICH and SMITH, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from conviction of assault in the second degree, § 565.060, RSMo 1994, and from sentence of imprisonment for one year.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 7 E0 00 1 . MI CHAEL KELL, et a l v . W I LMI N GTON TRUST NA, et a l

.

Pet i t i o ners Rev eran d M i ch ael J o h n Kel l an d Th e Fi rs t M e l i o ri t e Ch u rch ’ s

“ M ot i o n fo r an Ord er o f Su p ers ed eas ” hav i n g b een read an d co n s id ered
, t h e s am e i s h erei n DENIED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i t n e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 

## 08/17/2016 August 17, 2016
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ADIL SHAFI,

Counter -Plaintiff(s),

vs Case No: 09-10454

Honorable Victoria A. Roberts

BRAINTECH, INC.,

Counter-Defendant(s),

___________________________________/

NOTICE OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE ON PENDING MOTION

RE: COUNTER-PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE

RESPONSE/REPLY

The Court received the above motion. The moving party must immediately contact other

counsel of record to find a convenient time within the next three (3) days to hold a telephone

conference with the Court. After checking schedules, the moving party must contact my

secretary, Linda Vertriest, to arrange a conference. After this telephone conference, the Court

will determine the necessity for more formal consideration of the motion.

Do not file a response to this motion before the telephone conference. And no party can

file additional motions at this time. If time permits, the Court will discuss other issues during the

telephone conference.

 /s/ Victoria A. Roberts 

Victoria A. Roberts

Dated: August 8, 2013 United States District Court Judge

NOTE: The Court will consider the assessment of reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion,

including attorney fees, if this motion is not resolved before the telephone conference. Such assessment

will be made if concurrence was sought before the motion was filed and continues to be unreasonably

withheld at the time of the telephone conference.

_________________________________________________________________

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this notice was served upon on the above date by electronic filing or fax.

s/ Richard Loury

Deputy Clerk

2:09-cv-10454-VAR-LJM Doc # 163 Filed 08/08/13 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 3472
**Exhibit 99**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Gregory A. Mitchell,President and Chief Executive Officer of People’s Preferred Capital Corporation(the “Company”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to myknowledge the foregoing annual report of the Company:

 

(1)                           fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d),and,

(2)                           the information contained in this report fairlypresents in all material aspects the financial condition of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  March 21, 2003 |   |                 |
|-----------------------------|--------|----------------------|
|                        |   | Gregory A. Mitchell  |
|                        |   | President and C.E.O. |

 

 

I, Karen Schoenbaum, ChiefFinancial Officer of People’s Preferred Capital Corporation (the “Company”), dohereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge theforegoing annual report of the Company:

 

(1)                            fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d),and,

(2)                            the information contained in this reportfairly presents in all material aspects the financial condition of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  March 21, 2003 |   |                    |
|-----------------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                        |   | Karen Schoenbaum        |
|                        |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

I, Nancy Gilson, Controller ofPeople’s Preferred Capital Corporation (the “Company”), do hereby certify inaccordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge the foregoing annual report ofthe Company:

 

(2)                            fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d),and,

(2)                            the information contained in this reportfairly presents in all material aspects the financial condition of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  March 21, 2003 |   |            |
|-----------------------------|--------|-----------------|
|                        |   | Nancy H. Gilson |
|                        |   | Controller      |

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

LISA VERDUSCO,

Plaintiff,

Case Number 09-11607-BC

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

ST. MARY’S MEDICAL CENTER,

Defendant.

______________________________________ /

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING AS MOOT

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND/OR FOR SANCTIONS

This matter is before the Court on a report and recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge

Charles E. Binder on June 28, 2010. Judge Binder recommends that the Court deny as moot

Defendant’s motion to dismiss and/or for sanctions because the parties resolved the issue underlying

the motion, which was difficulty taking Plaintiff’s deposition. As of today’s date, no party has filed

any objections to Judge Binder’s report and recommendation. The decision to not object to the

Judge Binder’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record. Thomas

v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the report and recommendation [Dkt # 26] is ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss and/or for sanctions [Dkt. # 18]

is DENIED AS MOOT.

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: September 7, 2010
-2-

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on September 7, 2010.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

LIVIA GUILLERMETY, GLENN D.

EDGMON, and FIORE BOTTA,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SECRETARY OF EDUCATION OF

THE UNITED STATES and the SECRETARY

OF TREASURY OF THE UNITED STATES, 

Defendant.

___________________________________ /

Case Number: 01-74904

JUDGE PAUL D. BORMAN

MAG. JUDGE STEVEN D. PEPE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION IN FAVOR OF DENYING PLAINTIFF EDGMON’S 

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Pepe’s Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 87, April 8,

2005) in favor of denying Plaintiff Edgmon’s Motion for Attorney Fees. Plaintiff filed objections to the

Report and Recommendation on April 18, 2005, but withdrew those objection on December 16, 2005. 

Having reviewed that Report and Recommendation, the Court enters as its findings and conclusions the

Report and Recommendation denying Plaintiff Edgmon’s Motion for Attorney Fees. 

SO ORDERED.

s/Paul D. Borman 

PAUL D. BORMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: February 9, 2006

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served on the attorneys of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on February 9,

2006.

s/Jonie Parker 

Case Manager

2:01-cv-74904-PDB Doc # 93 Filed 02/09/06 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 643
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Bravo Payments Systems, Inc.,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 09-11232

Jill Hindes, Hugh Hindes, Steve Malin, Honorable Sean F. Cox

and Maria Malin,

Defendants.

__________________________________/

EX PARTE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

AND NOTICE OF STATUS CONFERENCE AND MOTION HEARING

Plaintiff Bravo Payments Systems, Inc. (“BPS”) has filed a Verified Complaint and a

motion seeking an ex parte temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. After

reviewing the Verified Complaint and the motion, the Court concludes that the Verified

Complaint shows that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to BPS

before Defendants can be heard in opposition to BPS’s motion.

IT IS ORDERED that Defendants JILL HINDES, HUGH HINDES, STEVE MALIN,

and MARIA MALIN are RESTRAINED from:

a. having any interest in or being associated with (whether as a shareholder, partner,

member, associate, owner, employee, consultant, agent or otherwise) any corporation,

partnership, limited liability company, association, trust, firm or other enterprise which

competes with BPS in the same business for a period of one (1) year;

b. from directly or indirectly soliciting or servicing BPS customers or identifiable prospects

for a period of two (2) years from the date of this Court’s Order, as specifically set forth

in the parties’ Referral Agreement;

c. from using or disclosing at any time in the future BPS’s confidential business

information, trade secrets, proprietary information or property;

d. from interfering, in any way, with any current merchant or prospective client relationship

2:09-cv-11232-SFC-RSW Doc # 6 Filed 04/02/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 59
of BPS; and

e. from breaching any fiduciary obligation, including, but not limited to, using or disclosing

BPS’s confidential and proprietary information, appropriating any business opportunity

of BPS, and engaging in deceptive acts or statements with regard to BPS’s abilities,

experiences, and/or personnel, to gain an unfair advantage in the merchant services

industry.

This Order was issued at approximately 5:00 p.m. on April 2, 2009. This Order shall remain in

effect until the Court rules on the pending Motion for Preliminary Injunction.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall appear for a STATUS

CONFERENCE in this matter on April 9, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. Parties and client representatives

are required to add the Status Conference in person, along with counsel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 2, 2009 S/ Sean F. Cox 

Sean F. Cox

United States District Court Judge

 

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing order was served upon counsel of record via the Court’s ECF

System and/or U. S. Mail on April 2, 2009.

s/Jennifer Hernandez 

Case Manager to

District Judge Sean F. Cox

2:09-cv-11232-SFC-RSW Doc # 6 Filed 04/02/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 60
#### Shannon POWELL, Appellant, v. The JONES STORE CO., Respondent.

No. WD 51432.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 2, 1996.

Lance A. Riddle, Warrensburg, for appellant.

Mark E. Harris, Kansas City, for respondent.

Before LAURA DENVIR STITH, P.J., and ULRICH and SMART, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Shannon Powell appeals an adverse verdict in her personal injury action against the Jones Store Co. She contends the trial court erred in refusing to allow her to take depositions just before trial and during trial, and in excluding expert testimony about an examination of plaintiff on the day of trial.

The court has carefully considered the arguments of Ms. Powell, and concludes that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum of the basis for our decision is furnished to the parties.
EXHIBIT 31.1
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Andrew B. Shearer, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Industrial Distribution Group, Inc.; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisannual report; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c)  disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: March 11, 2005 /s/ Andrew B. Shearer   Andrew B. Shearer   President and Chief Executive Officer
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3990

To encourage the formation of private sector projects to promote the

development of women’s business enterprise.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 2, 1996

Mr. LAFALCE (for himself, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. MEEHAN, Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ, Mr.

BENTSEN, Mr. BALDACCI, Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Ms. MILLENDERMCDONALD, and Mr. BLUMENAUER) introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on Small Business

A BILL

To encourage the formation of private sector projects to

promote the development of women’s business enterprise.

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

3 That section 19(g) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.

4 656(g)) is repealed, and subsection (h) is re-designated

5 as subsection (g).

Æ
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WALTHAM LIQUOR,

Plaintiff(s), CASE NUMBER: 09-10835

HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND 

NUTRITION SERVICE,

Defendant(s).

 /

 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO DISMISS

Waltham Liquor store (“Waltham”) was disqualified from participating in the

Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (“WIC”). 

Subsequently, Waltham was disqualified from participating in the Supplemental Nutrition

Assistance Program (“SNAP”) for three years. 7 C.F.R. §279.7(a) provides that such

firms have no remedy in federal court:

Except for firms disqualified from the [SNAP] program in accordance with

§278.6(e)(8) [i.e., firms previously disqualified from the WIC program], a

firm aggrieved by the determination of the designated reviewer may obtain

judicial review of the determination by filing a complaint against the United

States in the U.S. district court for the district in which the owner resides or

is engaged in business, or in any court of record of the State having

competent jurisdiction.

See also 7 U.S.C. §2021(g)(2)(C) (a retailer’s disqualification from SNAP, which results

from a disqualification from WIC, shall not be subject to judicial review). 

Nonetheless, Waltham filed a Petition for Judicial Review of Defendant’s decision

to disqualify Waltham from participating in SNAP on March 5, 2009. Waltham says

2:09-cv-10835-VAR-RSW Doc # 6 Filed 08/27/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 73
2

Defendant should have imposed a civil money penalty instead of disqualification. 

Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. #4). Defendant asks

the Court to dismiss Waltham’s petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1).

Waltham did not respond.

The Court has considered Defendant’s motion on the merits, and agrees it lacks

subject matter jurisdiction. 

Defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. 

IT IS ORDERED.

s/Victoria A. Roberts 

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge

Dated: August 27, 2009

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of

record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on

August 27, 2009.

s/Linda Vertriest 

Deputy Clerk

2:09-cv-10835-VAR-RSW Doc # 6 Filed 08/27/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 74
|Exhibit 99.2CERTIFICATION





Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act), Jane A.
Freeman, the Chief Financial Officer of Scientific Learning Corporation (the
Company), hereby certifies that, to the best of her knowledge:


     1.    
          The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,
          2002, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.2 (the
          Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section
          13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and


2.     The
information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all           material
respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the           period
covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company           for the
period covered by the Periodic Report.


Dated: March 28, 2003
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|By /s/ Jane A. Freeman
Jane A. FreemanChief Financial Officer |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

|This certification accompanies this
Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and shall not be deemed
filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to Scientific Learning Corporation and will be retained by the Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Ring Energy, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert “Steve” Owens, 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)  This Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

 (2)  I further certify to the best of my knowledge that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Ring Energy, Inc.

 

 

| Date: May 15, 2009 | By /s/ Robert “Steve” Owens |
|--------------------|---------------------------------------|

|   | Robert “Steve” Owens, President, |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|

|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|--------|-------------------------|