alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHARLENE M. HAMILTON,

Plaintiff, Case No. 09-11553

v.

Hon. John Corbett O’Meara

COMMISSIONER OF 

SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

____________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen’s August 15, 2011 report and

recommendation. Defendant filed an objection to the report and recommendation on August 29,

2011. 

This court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or

specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(C). The court “may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate.” Id.

Having thoroughly reviewed the entire record, the court finds that Magistrate Judge

Whalen reached the correct conclusions. Accordingly, the court will overrule Defendant's

objection. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the report and recommendation is ADOPTED as the

court’s findings and conclusions.

s/John Corbett O’Meara 

United States District Judge

Date: April 24, 2013

5:09-cv-11553-JCO-RSW Doc # 41 Filed 04/24/13 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 1084
-2-

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

on this date, April 24, 2013, using the ECF system.

s/William Barkholz 

Case Manager

5:09-cv-11553-JCO-RSW Doc # 41 Filed 04/24/13 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 1085
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANTHONY J. PHILLIPS, Sr., 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

D. MELO TREJOS, Correctional Officer,

individual, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 22-55113

D.C. No. 

2:17-cv-04673-MCS-SHK

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Mark C. Scarsi, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 15, 2023** 

San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE, FERNANDEZ, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Anthony Phillips appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment

in favor of Defendant D. Melo Trejos in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action

FILED

MAR 16 2023

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 panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without

oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
alleging excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. We review de

novo,1 and we affirm. 

The district court correctly determined that there was no genuine dispute of

material fact that Trejos did not use excessive force when he deployed a sponge

round from a forty millimeter launcher to break up a fight between Phillips and

another inmate. The evidence before the district court showed that Trejos did not

act maliciously or sadistically. See Simmons v. Arnett, 47 F.4th 927, 932–33 & n.1

(9th Cir. 2022); see also U.S. Const. amend. VIII; Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312,

318–26, 106 S. Ct. 1078, 1083–87, 89 L. Ed. 2d 251 (1986).

The district court also correctly determined that Phillips failed to identify a

violation of a “clearly established right” that would defeat Trejos’s defense of

qualified immunity. See Mullenix v. Luna, 577 U.S. 7, 11–12, 136 S. Ct. 305, 308,

193 L. Ed. 2d 255 (2015) (per curiam). 

Phillips’s argument that Trejos was estopped from asserting a qualified

immunity defense on summary judgment after asserting the defense at the motion

to dismiss stage has no merit. See Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 306, 116 S.

Ct. 834, 839, 133 L. Ed. 2d 773 (1996). 

AFFIRMED.

1 Hughes v. Rodriguez, 31 F.4th 1211, 1218 (9th Cir. 2022).

2 22-55113
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FIDEL CRUZ FLETES,

Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 20

- 70671 Agency No. A098

- 598

- 530

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Immigration Judge
Submitted December 2 , 2020 * *
Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges. Fidel Cruz Fletes, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) de termination under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(a) that he did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Honduras and is thus not
entitled to relief from his reinstated removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review an IJ ’ s negative reasonable fear determination for

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

DEC 10 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 70671

substantial evidence. Andrade

- Garcia v. Lynch , 828 F.3d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 2016). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
To the extent Cruz Flete s raises an imputed political opinion clai m, we lack jurisdiction to consider it. See Barron v. Ashcroft , 358 F.3d 674, 677

- 78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to consider claims not raised below )

. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Cruz Fletes failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of persecution in Honduras on account of a protected ground

. See Reyes v. Lynch , 842 F.3d 1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular group, “[t]he applicant must
‘establis h that the group is (1) composed of members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting Matter of M

- E

- V

- G

- , 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014)) ) ; see also Ramirez

- Munoz v. Lynch , 816 F.3d 1226, 1229 (9th Cir. 2016) ( imputed wealthy returnee social group not cognizable ) ; Delgado

- Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 115 1

- 5 2 (9th Cir. 2010) ( returnee

- based social group not cognizable ).
Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s determination that Cruz Fletes
fail ed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of torture by or with the consent of the government if returned to Honduras

. See Andrade

- Garcia , 828 F.3d at 836

- 37 (no reasonable possibility of torture with state action).3 20

- 70671

We reject as unsupported by the record Cruz Fletes’ contention that the IJ
violated his right to due process. The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the
mandate. The motion for a stay of removal (Docket Entry No. 2) and supplemental motion for a stay of removal (Docket Entry No. 8) are otherwise denied. PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
2:09-cr-20152-AJT-PJK Doc # 4 Filed 03/26/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 6
2:09-cr-20152-AJT-PJK Doc # 4 Filed 03/26/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 7
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22
- 6855
VINCENT SQUIRE , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. MS. WITT; MS. MOSLEY , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Raymond A. Jackson , Senior District Judge. ( 2:20

- cv - 00376

- RAJ

- LRL )

Submitted : November 22, 2022 Decided: November 29, 2022

Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Vincent Squire, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6855 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/29/2022 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Vincent Squire seeks to appe al the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice Squire’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to prosecute and providing Squire the opportunity to file an amended complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541,
545

- 46 (1949). The order Squire seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Britt v. DeJoy , 45 F.4th 790, 793 , 797 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order) (explaining that a district court’s “order that dismisses a complaint with leave to amend is not a final decision” and that plaintiff must either file an am ended complaint in the district court or “request that the district court enter a final decision dismissing [his] case without leave to amend”). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.
DISMISSED USCA4 Appeal: 22-6855 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/29/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1



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




In connection with the Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report of CPC of America, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Rod A. Shipman, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:


         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.




May 3, 2006                                     /s/ Rod A. Shipman
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Rod A. Shipman,
                                                Chief Executive Officer and
                                                Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 28.2

                          ANNUAL SERVICER'S CERTIFICATE

                         CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA, N.A.


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

                       Chase Manhattan Owner Trust 1997-B

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


         The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Chase Manhattan
Bank USA, N.A. ("Chase USA"), as Servicer pursuant to the Sale and Servicing
Agreement dated as of June 1, 1997 (the "Sale and Servicing Agreement") by and
between Chase USA and Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association, as trustee
(the "Trustee"), does hereby certify that:

1.            A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period from
         January 1, 1999 until December 31, 1999 was conducted under my
         supervision.

2.            Based on such review, the Servicer has, to the best of my
         knowledge, fully performed in all material respects all its
         obligations, under the Sale and Servicing Agreement throughout such
         period and no material default in the performance of such obligations
         has occurred or is continuing except as set forth in paragraph 3 below.

3.       None.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this certificate
this 15th day of March 2000.

                                            /s/ Keith Schuck
                                            -------------------------
                                            Keith Schuck
                                            Vice President
Fialka-Feldman v. Oakland University Board of Trustees Doc. 45 Att. 24

Dockets.Justia.com
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          62,483
<SECURITIES>                                    50,498
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,226
<ALLOWANCES>                                       270
<INVENTORY>                                     11,578
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               155,528
<PP&E>                                          21,297
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,632
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 207,251
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,913
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            42
<OTHER-SE>                                     185,596
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   207,251
<SALES>                                        128,456
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               128,456
<CGS>                                           57,830
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   57,830
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                52,810
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    35
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  97
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 23,056
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,811
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,245
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,245
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .33


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

DOT HILL SYSTEMS CORP.    OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), James L. Lambert, Chief Executive Officer of Dot Hill
Systems Corp. (the "Company"), and Preston S. Romm, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, to the best of their knowledge:

1.     The
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1
(the "Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the
Annual Report and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Annual Report.

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 15th day of March, 2004.

|/s/JAMES L. LAMBERTJames L. Lambert Chief Executive
Officer |  | /s/PRESTON S. ROMMPreston S. Romm Chief Financial Officer
|----------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "SEC") or its staff upon request.

This
certification "accompanies" the Annual Report, is not deemed filed with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Annual Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such
filing.

---

QuickLinks
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT SADLER, #147503,

Plaintiff, Case No. 09-cv-11375

Hon. Anna Diggs Taylor

v. Magistrate Judge Mark A. Randon

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS, THOMAS

K. BELL, VIRGIL WEBB, ARUS

MONAHAN, RUM D. ANDISON,

OFFICER TERRILL, and

OFFICER GALLUP,

Defendants.

______________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

(Docket Entry 26)

This matter is before the court on Magistrate Judge Mark A. Randon’s Report and

Recommendation of November 9, 2009, recommending that Defendants Monihan, Gallup and

Terrill’s Motion for Summary Judgment be granted in-part and denied in-part.

The court has reviewed the file, Defendants’ Objection, and the Magistrate Judge’s Report

and Recommendation. Plaintiff did not file an Objection. The court finds that the law cited by the

Magistrate has been correctly placed and is controlling in this matter. 

THEREFORE, the court will accept the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation of

November 9, 2009, as the findings and conclusions of this court.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Randon’s Report and Recommendation

of November 9, 2009, is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Monihan, Gallup and Terrill’s Motion for

Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN-PART and DENIED IN-PART.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 2, 2010 s/Anna Diggs Taylor

ANNA DIGGS TAYLOR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2:09-cv-11375-AC-MAR Doc # 28 Filed 02/02/10 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 322
-2-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Order was served upon counsel of record via the Court's ECF System to

their respective email addresses or First Class U.S. mail disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on February 2,

2010.

Robert Sadler, #147503

Gus Harrison Correctional Facility

2727 East Beecher Street

Adrian, MI 49221 s/Johnetta M. Curry-Williams

Case Manager

2:09-cv-11375-AC-MAR Doc # 28 Filed 02/02/10 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 323
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 148 (Thursday, July 31, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44773-44774]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17512]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993 Petroleum Environmental Research Forum

    Notice is hereby given that, on July 9, 2008, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Petroleum Environmental Research 
Forum (``PERF'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with 
the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose 
of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, The Questor Centre, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UNITED 
KINGDOM has been added as a party to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and PERF intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On February 10, 1986, PERF filed its original notification pursuant 
to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a 
notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on 
March 14, 1986 (51 FR 8903).

[[Page 44774]]

    The last notification was filed with the Department on November 15, 
2007. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7762).

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. E8-17512 Filed 7-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1



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




In connection with the Amendment No. 2 to Annual Report of CPC of America, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Rod A. Shipman, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:


         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.




May 9, 2006                                     /s/ Rod A. Shipman
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Rod A. Shipman,
                                                Chief Executive Officer and
                                                Chief Financial Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 8, 2010 

jam 

Order 

 

June 8, 2010 

140997 

PAULA ANN NICE, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140997 

 COA: 295543 

MICHAEL KENNETH FRY, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

___________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, defendant-appellant having failed to pay the 

partial filing fee as required by the order of April 29, 2010, the Clerk of the Court is 

hereby directed to close this file.
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 Registrant as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
  By:
    
    /s/ Philip Cook
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Thomas F. DardenPhilip Cook
    
    
    
    
    
    Thomas F. DardenSenior Vice President  Chief Financial Officer
    
    
    
    
    
    President and Chief Executive Officer
Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 1 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 2 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 3 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 4 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 5 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 6 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 7 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 8 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 9 of 10

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM   Document 81-14    Filed 01/06/11   Page 10 of 10