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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1798

KOFFI STEVE RAOUL DAGBA,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A97-198-597)

Submitted: April 21, 2008 Decided: May 1, 2008

Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Oti W. Nwosu, THE LAW OFFICE OF OTI W. NWOSU, Arlington, Virginia,

for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General,

Stephen J. Flynn, Senior Litigation Counsel, Arthur L. Rabin,

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Koffi Steve Raoul Dagba, a native and citizen of Togo,

seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

(Board) denying his motion to reconsider the denial of his motion

to reopen removal proceedings. We have reviewed the administrative

record and Dagba’s claims and find no abuse of discretion in the

denial of the motion to reconsider. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a), (b)

(2007). 

We accordingly deny the petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 150 (Monday, August 4, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 45266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17768]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11308]


Illinois Disaster Number IL-00016

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 3.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Illinois 
(FEMA--1771--DR), dated 06/24/2008.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding.
    Incident Period: 06/01/2008 through 07/22/2008.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/22/2008.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 08/25/2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of 
Illinois, dated 06/24/2008, is hereby amended to establish the incident 
period for this disaster as beginning 06/01/2008 and continuing through 
07/22/2008.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-17768 Filed 8-1-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4087 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4087

To designate certain Federal lands in the Talladega National Forest in 
        the State of Alabama as the Dugger Mountain Wilderness.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 17, 1996

 Mr. Browder introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
      Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on 
Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 
 in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate certain Federal lands in the Talladega National Forest in 
        the State of Alabama as the Dugger Mountain Wilderness.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Dugger Mountain Wilderness Act of 
1996''.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF DUGGER MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS, ALABAMA.

    (a) Designation.--In furtherance of the purposes of the Wilderness 
Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), certain Federal lands in the Talladega 
National Forest in the State of Alabama, which comprise approximately 
14,000 acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled ``Dugger Mountain 
Wilderness--Proposed'' and dated ____ 1996, are hereby designated as 
wilderness and, therefore, as components of the National Wilderness 
Preservation System, and shall be known as the Dugger Mountain 
Wilderness.
    (b) Map and Description.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall submit to 
Congress a map and a boundary description of the area designated as 
wilderness by this section. The map and description shall have the same 
force and effect as if included in this Act, except that the Secretary 
may correct clerical and typographical errors in the map and 
description. The map and boundary description shall also be on file and 
available for public inspection in appropriate offices of the 
Department of Agriculture.
    (c) Management.--Subject to valid existing rights, lands designated 
as wilderness by this section shall be managed by the Secretary of 
Agriculture in accordance with the Wilderness Act, except that, with 
respect to the wilderness area designated by this section, any 
reference in the Wilderness Act to the effective date of the Wilderness 
Act shall be deemed to be a reference to the date of enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 4.1


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


2 HANSON PLACE, 12TH FLOOR, BROOKLYN,
N.Y. 11217


 


 


 


April 15, 2014


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


Smart Trust, Tax-Advantaged Growth &
Income Trust, Series 4


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York
Mellon is acting as trustee for Smart Trust, Tax-Advantaged Growth & Income Trust, Series 4 set forth above (the “Trust”).
We enclosed a list of the Securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date hereof. The prices indicated therein reflect our
evaluation of such Securities as of close of business on April 15, 2014, in accordance with the valuation method set forth in the
Trust Indenture and Agreement. We consent to the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations
of the Trust Securities in the Registration Statement (No. 333-194353) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect
to the registration of the sale of the Trust Units and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/
GERARDO CIPRIANO                   


Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

BLACKWARD PROPERTIES, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

BANK OF AMERICA, 

Defendant.

Case No. 09-12598

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT

JUDGE

ARTHUR J. TARNOW

 /

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND/OR TO

ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT [55]

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration and/or to Alter or Amend

Judgment [55] brought pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 59. 

Local Rule 7.1(h)(3) provides that:

Generally, and without restricting the court’s discretion, the court will not grant

motions for rehearing or reconsideration that merely present the same issues ruled

upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication. The movant

must not only demonstrate a palpable defect by which the court and the parties

and other persons entitled to be heard on the motion have been misled but also

show that correcting the defect will result in a different disposition of the case.

A party may not utilize a motion for reconsideration “to introduce new legal theories for the first

time, to raise legal argumentation which could have been heard during the pendency of the

previous motion, or to present evidence that could have been adduced during the pendency of the

original motion.” See Tkach v. Stonepath Logistics Services, et al., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

44354 at *2 (E.D. Mich. 2005). Additionally, motions to alter or amend brought under Fed. R.

Civ. P. 59(e) “may be granted if there is a clear error of law, newly discovered evidence, an

intervening change in controlling law, or to prevent manifest injustice.” See Gencorp, Inc. v.
2

American Int’l Underwriters, 178 F.3d 804, 834 (6th Cir. 1999) (citations omitted).

Plaintiff’s motion lacks merit. The motion offers arguments this Court previously

rejected. To the extent any new arguments are raised, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate why

those arguments could not have been previously offered. Moreover, Plaintiff has not

demonstrated any grounds for altering or amending the prior judgment. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration

and/or to Alter or Amend Judgment [55] is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

s/Arthur J. Tarnow 

Arthur J. Tarnow

Senior United States District Judge

Dated: August 31, 2010

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on

August 31, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/LaShawn R. Saulsberry 

Case Manager
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

BEVERLY JEFFRIES,

Plaintiff(s), CASE NUMBER: 09-12137

HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 

Defendant(s).

 /

 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On February 17, 2010, Magistrate Judge Charles E. Binder submitted a Report

and Recommendation (Doc. #19) recommending that the Court: (1) DENY Plaintiff’s

Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #8); and (2) GRANT Defendant’s Motion for

Summary Judgment (Doc. #18). 

Because the Court has not received objections from either party within the time

frame provided for in 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich. LR 72.1(d), the Court

ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff’s motion is

DENIED; Defendant’s motion is GRANTED. 

IT IS ORDERED. 

S/Victoria A. Roberts 

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge

Dated: March 9, 2010
2

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of

record and Beverly Jeffries by electronic

means or U.S. Mail on March 9, 2010.

s/Carol A. Pinegar 

Deputy Clerk
EX-10.77



 Exhibit 10.77 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 

AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 

This First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is entered into and effective as of
April 11, 2014, by and between Goodman Networks Incorporated (the “Company”) and Jonathan E. Goodman (“Employee”). 

WHEREAS, the parties hereto are parties to that certain Amended and Restated Executive Employment Agreement, dated February 1, 2013, by
and between the Company and Employee (the “Agreement”); and 
 WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to
provide for the annual granting of equity awards by the Company to Employee. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises
and the mutual promises set forth in this Amendment, the Company and Employee hereby amend the Agreement as follows: 
 1. Section 4 of
the Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following new Section 4.9: 
 4.9 Annual Equity Grant. During each
year of the Term, Employee shall be eligible to receive an annual award of equity compensation, of the type and in the amounts and subject to such terms as determined by the Board, in its sole discretion. Such awards of equity compensation shall be
subject to the terms and conditions of the Company’s equity incentive plans, as they may be amended from time to time in the Company’s sole discretion, and the award agreements granting such equity compensation pursuant to such plans. 

2. Except as specifically modified by this Amendment, the Agreement shall otherwise remain in full force and effect in accordance with its
terms. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed as of the date set forth above. 

 

			
	GOODMAN NETWORKS INCORPORATED
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Ron B. Hill

	Name:	 	Ron B. Hill
	Title:	 	Chief Executive Officer and President
	
	EXECUTIVE
	
	 /s/ Jonathan E. Goodman

	Jonathan E. Goodman
---

|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 Mobile Data Corp.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending January 31, 2010 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Steven Cozine, President, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and a member
of the Board of Directors, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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;
  and                                   
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                 
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

/s/ Steven Cozine
  Steven Cozine 
  Chief Executive Officer March 17, 2010

---
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 130 (Friday, July 5, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35138-35139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17112]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 35139]]

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 90-214; RM-7101 and RM-7226]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Homerville, Lakeland, and 
Statenville, GA

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; petition for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission affirms the grant of the rulemaking petition 
(RM-7226) of Lakeland Broadcasters, Inc., permittee of a station 
authorized to operate on Channel 290A, Lakeland, Georgia, requesting an 
upgrade from a Class A to a Class C3 channel. See Memorandum Opinion 
and Order 58 FR 26918, May 6, 1993. In so doing, the Commission denies 
the petition for reconsideration of La Taurus Productions, Inc. and 
dismisses as moot the petition for reconsideration filed by Southland 
Radio, Inc.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 5, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul R. Gordon, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2130.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission declined to reconsider the 
allotment of Channel 248A to Statenville, Georgia, as that community's 
first local transmission service, and the upgrade of Channel 290A in 
Lakeland, Georgia, to Channel 290C3. Channel 248B can be allotted to 
Statenville in compliance with the Commission's requirements for 
minimum station distance separations with a site restricted to 16.0 
kilometers (9.9 miles) northeast of Statenville, at reference 
coordinates 30, 46, 24 North, 82, 52, 50 West. With this action, the 
proceeding is terminated.
    This is a summary of the Commission's Second Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, MM Docket No. 90-214, adopted June 21, 1996 and released June 
28, 1996. The full text of this Commission decision is available for 
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Dockets 
Branch (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, DC. The complete 
text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy 
contractor, International Transcription Services, (202) 857-3800, 2100 
M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
Douglas W. Webbink,
Chief, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 96-17112 Filed 7-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3, No. 333-13363,
Form S-3, No. 333-03205, Form S-8, No. 333-81863, and Form S-8, No. 333-81865) of The
Mills Corporation and in the related Prospectuses of our report dated February 20, 2001, except for the fourth paragraph of Note 1, as to which the date is August 6, 2001, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of The Mills Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year ended December 31, 2000 filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 13, 2001.

/s/
ERNST & YOUNG LLP

McLean,
Virginia
August 10, 2001

---

QuickLinks
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Jeron KENT, Appellant.

No. 64847.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Aug. 29, 1995.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Oct. 17, 1995.

Application to Transfer Denied Nov. 21, 1995.

*803Deborah B. Wafer, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

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

Before GRIMM, C.J., REINHARD, P.J., and CRAHAN, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals following his conviction by a jury of second degree murder and armed criminal action for which he was sentenced to serve consecutive terms of fifteen and ten years respectively. In his sole point on appeal, Defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements made orally and recorded on audiotape and on a videotaped reenactment of the crime. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error. An opinion reciting the detañed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only setting forth our reasoning. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 31, 2000
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                          16,705
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   80,750
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,489
<INVENTORY>                                    171,769
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               292,766
<PP&E>                                         228,999
<DEPRECIATION>                                  87,745
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 560,580
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          133,715
<BONDS>                                        427,094
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          207,125
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           302
<OTHER-SE>                                   (281,785)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   560,580
<SALES>                                        767,685
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               767,685
<CGS>                                          442,325
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  442,325
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,031
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              52,293
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,256
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,576
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,067)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  1,225
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,842)<F1>
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.53)
<FN>
<F1>NET INCOME (LOSS) IS SHOWN BEFORE REDEEMABLE PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDENDS AND
ACCRETION OF PREFERRED STOCK DISCOUNT OF $28,796.
</FN>


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WILLARD L. SLOAN, EUGENE J.

WINNINGHAM, and JAMES L. KELLEY, 

on behalf of themselves and a similarly 

situated class, Case No. 09-cv-10918

Hon. Paul D. Borman

Plaintiffs, Magistrate Mona K. Majzoub

v. Class Action

BORGWARNER, INC., BORGWARNER 

FLEXIBLE BENEFITS PLANS and

BORGWARNER DIVERSIFIED 

TRANSMISSION PRODUCTS, INC.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________________________________________________/

EXHIBIT 29 

TO 

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION 

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

AS TO LIABILITY

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 104-14 Filed 05/14/12 Pg 1 of 6 Pg ID 5756
2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 104-14 Filed 05/14/12 Pg 2 of 6 Pg ID 5757
2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 104-14 Filed 05/14/12 Pg 3 of 6 Pg ID 5758
2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 104-14 Filed 05/14/12 Pg 4 of 6 Pg ID 5759
2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 104-14 Filed 05/14/12 Pg 5 of 6 Pg ID 5760
2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 104-14 Filed 05/14/12 Pg 6 of 6 Pg ID 5761