alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1286

CHESTER SANDERLIN, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JO ANNE B. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-62-2-1BO) Submitted: November 3, 2004 Decided: January 18, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, Thomas M. Bondy, Teal Luthy Miller, Attorneys, Appellate Staff, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Mason Hogan, KATHLEEN SHANNON GLANCY, P.A., Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”), appeals the district court’s order remanding the case to the administrative law judge for further development of the record. We affirm. Our review of the Commissioner’s decision is limited to an inquiry into whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Commissioner, and whether the correct legal standards were applied. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2000); Hays v. Sullivan , 907 F.2d 1453, 1456 (4th Cir. 1990). When there are conflicting physician opinions, as in this case, we have required explicit indications as to the weight given to all the evidence. See Gordon v. Schweiker , 725 F.2d 231, 235 (4th Cir. 1984) (citing cases); see also Murphy v. Bowen , 810 F.2d 433, 437 (4th Cir. 1987). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sanderlin v. Barnhart , No. CA-02-62-2-1BO (E.D.N.C. Dec. 29, 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
Order entered November 12 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 13

- 00709

- CR

WILLIAM AUTREY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Cour t Cause No. F10

- 16130

- Q



### O RDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On October 23, 2013, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why the

clerk’s and reporter’s records had not been filed. On November 6 and 8, 2013, we received the

reporter’s r ecord and exhibits, and on November 8, 2013, we received the clerk’s record.

Therefore, in the interest of expediting the appeal, we VACATE the October 23, 2013 order

requiring findings.

Appellant’s brief is due within thirty days of the date of this orde r.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.2

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection
with the Annual Report of LifeCare Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Chris A. Walker,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: March 31, 2009 |  |                        
|                     |  | /s/ Chris A. Walker    
|                     |  | Chris A. Walker        
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6454 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6454

 To clarify the primary functions and duties of the Office of Advocacy 
     of the Small Business Administration, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 20, 2022

 Mr. Luetkemeyer (for himself and Mr. Carter of Louisiana) introduced 
   the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Small 
                                Business

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To clarify the primary functions and duties of the Office of Advocacy 
     of the Small Business Administration, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Small Business Advocacy Improvements 
Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO PRIMARY FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF 
              ADVOCACY OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION.

    (a) Primary Functions.--Section 202 of Public Law 94-305 (15 U.S.C. 
634b) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and the international 
        economy'' after ``economy'';
            (2) in paragraph (9), by striking ``complete'' and 
        inserting ``compete''; and
            (3) in paragraph (12), by striking ``serviced-disabled'' 
        and inserting ``service-disabled''.
    (b) Duties.--Section 203(a) of Public Law 94-305 (15 U.S.C. 634c) 
is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(7) represent the views and interests of small businesses 
        before foreign governments and international entities for the 
        purpose of contributing to regulatory and trade initiatives 
        which may affect small businesses.''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 23-0563

_________________

JORY RUSSELL STRIZICH,

 Petitioner and Appellant,

 v.

STATE OF MONTANA,

 Respondent and Appellee.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to Appellant’s motion for extension to time to file the opening brief and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is given an extension of time to and 

including February 12, 2024, to file the opening brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 9 2024

01/09/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0563
#### John Emrich, Plaintiff, v. Joseph Serpe and Another, Defendants.

Motion for stay denied, with costs. Present — Hirschberg, P. J., Woodward, Jenks, Rich and Miller, J J.
217 La. 671

#### BIRDWELL v. BIRDWELL.

No. 39023.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 29, 1950.

See also 214 La. 401, 37 So.2d 850.

James -W. Jones, Jr., Natchitoches, for appellant. ■ ■:

Russell E. Gahagan, Natchitoches, for-plaintiff-appellee.

FOURNET, Chief Justice.

The appellant having failed to make an appearance in this court or to file a brief in support of his appeal, the appeal will be dismissed. See Grand Lodge of Louisiana Knights of Pythias, v. Natchitoches Lodge, 215 La. 300, 40 So.2d 472.

Appeal dismissed.
ACE-3.31.2014-Ex 10.1






Exhibit 10.1
ACE Limited
Outside Directors Compensation Parameters
August 2013


		
	•
	Annual Retainer Fee of $260,000. Paid $160,000 in restricted stock and $100,000 cash or, at the election of the director, $260,000 in restricted stock. Includes expectation of service on up to two committees (not counting service on Executive Committee). No fees are payable for regular board or committee meetings.




		
	•
	Annual premiums for committee chairs and lead director:




      —       Audit–$25,000        
      —       Compensation–$20,000    
      —       Risk & Finance–$15,000
      —       Nominating & Governance–$12,000        
      —       Lead director–$50,000


		
	•
	Annual premiums for selected committee service (non-chair):  None.




		
	•
	Committee chair and lead director service premiums are payable in cash quarterly or, at the election of the director, in restricted stock annually.




		
	•
	Meeting fees for “special” meetings (required to consider transactions or other special circumstances, as determined jointly by the Lead Director and Chairman): $2,000 per telephone meeting, $3,000 for ‘in person’ meetings.  Payable in cash quarterly.




		
	•
	Restricted stock will be awarded at beginning of the plan year (i.e. the date of the Annual General Meeting) and become non-forfeitable at end of the plan year, provided that the grantee has remained an ACE director continuously during that plan year.  Increases shall be paid on a pro-rated basis, based on date of award.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

January 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131951 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 131951 

 COA: 259184 

Saginaw CC: 04-024225-FC 

MAURICE DEWAYNE MAYES, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 25, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

t0122 

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. 

January 29, 2007 

 Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1998             JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-30-1997             DEC-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1997             MAR-29-1997
<CASH>                                               5                       7
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,849                  29,098
<ALLOWANCES>                                       328                     333
<INVENTORY>                                     34,034                  43,703
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,074                  79,258
<PP&E>                                          14,630                  14,430
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,429)                (10,086)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,576                  84,772
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,879                  29,518
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            33                      32
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,112                  25,814
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,576                  84,772
<SALES>                                         77,038                  81,042
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                77,038                  81,042
<CGS>                                           65,687                  69,826
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   65,687                  69,826
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,413                  10,184
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 522                     517
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    416                     515
<INCOME-TAX>                                       150                     185
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                266                     330
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                       266                     330
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.09                    0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.09                    0.11
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of ONLINE  ORIGINALS,  INC. (the "Company")
on Form  10-K  for the  period  ended  November  30,  2008,  as  filed  with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gregory
Adams,  Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that:

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

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



Date: March 6, 2009


By:       /s/ Gregory Adams

         Gregory Adams
         Chief Financial Officer, principal financial officer and principal
         accounting officer
#### In re Jerome ADDISON, Petitioner.

No. 02-7282.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 7, 2002.

Decided Nov. 14, 2002.

Jerome Addison, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Jerome Addison petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We find there has been no undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petition. We deny the motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 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.*
EXHIBIT 31(a)

I, Thomas M. Patrick, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)	Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)	Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  February 9, 2004

  /s/  Thomas M. Patrick
Exhibit 23.1





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm




To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Arotech Corporation


Ann Arbor, Michigan:




We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-153487) and Form S-8 (Nos. 333-160717, 333-146752, 333-124960, 333-86728 and 333-59902) of Arotech Corporation of our report dated March 30, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Arotech Corporation which appear in this Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.







/s/ BDO USA, LLP





BDO USA, LLP





Grand Rapids, Michigan


March 30, 2011
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


Board of Directors
SigmaTron International, Inc.

We have issued our report dated June 27, 2003 accompanying the consolidated
balance sheets of SigmaTron International, Inc. at April 30, 2002 and 2003, and
the related statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for
the year then ended, and Schedule II included in the Annual Report of SigmaTron
International, Inc., and Subsidiary on Form 10-K for the years ended April 30,
2002 and 2003. We also included within the Annual Report of SigmaTron
International, Inc., and Subsidiary on Form 10-K, our report dated June 27, 2003
accompanying the balance sheet at April 30, 2002 and 2003, and the related
statements of income, partners' equity and cash flows for the years then ended
of SMT Unlimited L.P. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of
said reports in the Registration Statements of SigmaTron International, Inc.,
and Subsidiary on Forms S-8 (File No. 33 20147 and 333-52044).

                                                              GRANT THORNTON LLP

Chicago, Illinois
July 18, 2003
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6454 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6454

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 27, 2022

 Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business 
                          and Entrepreneurship

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To clarify the primary functions and duties of the Office of Advocacy 
     of the Small Business Administration, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Small Business Advocacy Improvements 
Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO PRIMARY FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF 
              ADVOCACY OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION.

    (a) Primary Functions.--Section 202 of Public Law 94-305 (15 U.S.C. 
634b) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and the international 
        economy'' after ``economy'';
            (2) in paragraph (9), by striking ``complete'' and 
        inserting ``compete''; and
            (3) in paragraph (12), by striking ``serviced-disabled'' 
        and inserting ``service-disabled''.
    (b) Duties.--Section 203(a) of Public Law 94-305 (15 U.S.C. 634c) 
is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(7) represent the views and interests of small businesses 
        before foreign governments and international entities for the 
        purpose of contributing to regulatory and trade initiatives 
        which may affect small businesses.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 26, 2022.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```