alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Roy Lee PALMER, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 02-17018.

D.C. No. CV-01-00376-LKK.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*987Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 21, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Federal prisoner Roy Lee Palmer appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal for lack of jurisdiction of his Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) action alleging negligence by prison dentists. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, *Brady v. United States,*211 F.3d 499, 502 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

Palmer filed his complaint within two weeks of submitting his administrative claim to the Bureau of Prisons. He therefore failed to comply with the administrative claim requirements of the FTCA. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2675(a) (claimant cannot file a FTCA action until the appropriate federal agency denies the administrative claim or fails to make a final determination of the claim within six months after it is filed). Accordingly, the district court correctly dismissed his action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. *See Jerves v. United States,*966 F.2d 517, 521 (9th Cir.1992) (“the administrative claim requirements of Section 2675(a) are jurisdictional in nature, and thus must be strictly adhered to”).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Anthony S. Shalom, Chief Executive Officer of Intcomex, Inc. (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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the Report), filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 31, 2008



/s/ Anthony S. ShalomAnthony S. ShalomChief Executive Officer (Chairman of the Board of
Directors)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Intcomex, Inc. and will be retained by Intcomex, Inc. and furnished to the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Herbert B. Lerner et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*Sportsmaster Co., Inc., Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

February 26, 1951.

*A. Friedman*for plaintiffs.

*Herman L. Falk*for defendant.

Charles D. Breitel, J.

The court is satisfied that defendant’s use of the name “ Sportsmaster ” in the manufacture or distribution of men’s sport apparel is unfairly competitive with plaintiff’s prior use of the name “ Sportmaster ”, without the intermediate “ s ”, upon sport shirts manufactured and distributed by plaintiff. Plaintiff is, accordingly, entitled to injunctive relief. On the other hand, plaintiff has not shown that he “ has been damaged in any quantitative sense ” *(Biltmore Pub. Co.*v. *Grayson Pub. Corp.,*272 App. Div. 504, 507); or particularly that ‘ ‘ the sales made by defendant would otherwise have gone to plaintiff or that plaintiff’s sales have been lessened by defendants’ sales ”. *(Biltmore Pub. Co.*v. *Grayson Pub. Corp., supra,*p. 507.) Consequently, an accounting is not justified.

*479From a consideration of all the evidence, the court is of the opinion that defendant’s conduct was neither intentionally deceptive nor malicious. Defendant’s motions to dismiss and for judgment are denied. Plaintiff’s motion for judgment is granted in accordance with the views above expressed, but without costs of the action to either party. Settle judgment.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>       5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Liquidating Trust's statement of net assets in liquidation at September 30,
1999 and the Liquidating Trust's statement of changes in net assets in
liquidation for the three and nine months ended September 30, 1999, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>           1,000

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                            139,486
<SECURITIES>                                       86,781
<RECEIVABLES>                                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        0
<PP&E>                                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    226,267
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              37,736
<BONDS>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        188,531
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      226,267
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    4,677
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      153
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     3,818
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 3,818
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                        3,818
<EPS-BASIC>                                         .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         .07


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10(b)

Contract No. 117164



NATURAL GAS PIPELINE COMPANY OF AMERICA (Natural)TRANSPORTATION RATE SCHEDULE DSSAMENDMENT NO. 2 DATED February 22, 2002TO AGREEMENT DATED March 9, 2000 (Agreement)



1. [ ]	Exhibit A dated February 22,2002. Changes Primary Receipt Point(s)/Secondary Receipt Point(s) and Point MDQ's. This Exhibit A replaces any previously dated Exhibit A.
2. [ ]	Exhibit B dated February 22, 2002. Changes Primary Delivery Point(s)/Secondary Delivery Point(s)and Point MDQ's. This Exhibit B replaces any previously dated Exhibit B.
3. [ ]	Exhibits A and B dated February 22, 2002. Changes Primary Receipt and Delivery Points/Secondary Receipt and Delivery Points. These Exhibits A and B replace any previously dated Exhibits A and B.
4. [ ]	Exhibit C dated February 22, 2002. Changes the Agreement's Path. This Exhibit C replaces any previously dated Exhibit C.
5. [ ]	Revise Agreement MDQ: [ ] Increase [ ] Decrease
In Section 2. of Agreement substitute MMBTU for MMBTU.
[ ]	Revise Agreement MSV: [ ] Increase [ ] Decrease
In Section 2. of Agreement substitute MMBtu for MMBtu.
6. [ ]	Revise Service Options
Service option selected (check any or all):
[ ] LN      [ ] SW      [ ] NB
7. [X]	The term of this Agreement is extended through April 30, 2004.
8. [ ]	Other: ___________________________________

This Amendment No. 2 becomes effective May 1, 2003.

Except as hereinabove amended, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect as written.

Agreed to by:

AGREED TO BY:

|NATURAL GAS PIPELINE COMPANY OF AMERICA   |  | NORTH SHORE GAS COMPANY        
|----------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------
|"Natural"                                 |  | "Shipper"                      
|By: /s/ David J. Devine                   |  | By: /s/ William E. Morrow      
|Name: David J. Devine                     |  | Name: William E. Morrow        
|Title: Vice President, Financial Planning |  | Title: Executive Vice President
Exhibit 99.1

                           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 Outsourcing Solutions Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Timothy G. Beffa, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certifies, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of  operations of the
Company.


                                         /s/ Timothy G. Beffa
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Timothy G. Beffa
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer

                                         August 13, 2002
**Exhibit
      32**








**Written
      Statement of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
      Officer**


**Pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350**








Solely
      for the
      purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned Chief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of The Peoples Gas Light and
      Coke
      Company (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30,
      2007
      (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of the Company.








/s/
      Lawrence T.
      Borgard


Lawrence
      T.
      Borgard


Vice
      Chairman of
      the Board and Chief Executive Officer











/s/
      Joseph P.
      O'Leary


Joseph
      P.
      O'Leary


Senior
      Vice
      President and Chief Financial Officer











Date:
      August 8,
      2007














This
      certification
      accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002 and shall not be deemed filed by The Peoples Gas Light and Coke 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 The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company and will be retained by
      The
      Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nathaniel WATKINS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-6983.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 24, 2002.

Decided Nov. 14, 2002.

*629Nathaniel Watkins, Appellant Pro Se. Michael R. Smythers, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Nathaniel Watkins appeals from the criminal judgment entered on January 11, 1991. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

In criminal cases, the defendant is accorded ten days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, *see*Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(4). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” *United States v. Raynor,*939 F.2d 191, 196 (4th Cir.1991). The district court’s final judgment was entered on the docket on January 11, 1991. Watkins’ notice of appeal was filed on June 12, 2002. Because Watkins failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
Exhibit 10.2


		
			Exhibit 10.2
		

		
			FIRST AMENDMENT
		

		
			 
		

		
			TO THE SYSCO CORPORATION 
		

		
			SUPPLMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN
		

		
			Pursuant to the authority granted the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Sysco Corporation (the "Compensation Committee") under Section 10.1 of the Sysco Corporation Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (the "SERP"), effective June 29, 2013, the Compensation Committee hereby amends the SERP as follows:
		

			
	
			
				 1.
			

			
	
			
			The first sentence of Section 4.4 of the SERP is hereby amended with the addition of the following clause as the conclusion of that sentence:




		
			"; provided that, any election by a married Participant of a form of payment other than the Joint and Survivor Annuity shall be ineffective unless the Participant's  spouse has indicated consent by completing and signing the applicable spousal consent section of the payment election form that may be prescribed by the Administrative Committee."
		

			
	
			
				 2.
			

			
	
			
			The third sentence of Section 6.4 of the SERP is hereby amended to read in its entirety as:




		
			''The amount of such hypothetical retirement benefit shall equal the Participant's Vested Accrued Benefit as determined under Section 4.2(a), reduced, for  the period by which the first  payment of the  death benefit precedes the first day of the month on or after date the Participant would have attained age sixty-five (65), by 5/9ths of one percent (1%) for each of the  first  one  hundred  twenty  (120)  calendar  months  and  actuarially thereafter (using the assumptions for  Actuarial Equivalence), adjusted as applicable, to take into account the form of such Participant's  Retirement Benefit under Section 4.4., without regard to the Participant's  election, if any, pursuant to Section 4.4."
		

		
			IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment 2014-1 to the SERP has been executed as of this 20th day of February, 2014.
		

		
			 
		

		
			SYSCO CORPORATION
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

			
					
						 

					
					
						 

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						By: /s/ Russell Libby                                             

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						           Russell Libby, General Counsel
Filed 1/10/14 P. v. Quiroz CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication 

or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered 

published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

CYNTHIA HERRERA QUIROZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

 B250556

 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct.

 No. SA082497)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Katherine 

Mader, Judge. Affirmed.

Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

______________________________
2

Following the denial of her motion to suppress evidence under Penal Code section 

1538.5, defendant and appellant Cynthia Herrera Quiroz entered a plea of no contest to 

misdemeanor possession of marijuana in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11357, 

subdivision (c). Defendant was placed on summary probation for a period of 24 months. She 

filed a timely notice of appeal, challenging the ruling on the motion to suppress evidence.

This court appointed counsel for defendant. Appointed counsel filed a brief raising no 

issues but requested this court to independently review the record for arguable contentions 

pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Defendant was advised by letter from this 

court dated November 4, 2013, of her right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days. The 

30-day period has lapsed and no brief has been received.

We have completed our independent review of the record and find no arguable appellate 

contentions. The trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress the marijuana 

which formed the basis for the prosecution. An officer observed defendant driving a vehicle 

connected to a ticket that had gone to warrant. Defendant’s driving privilege had been 

suspended. Because the other three occupants of the vehicle were unlicensed, and leaving the 

vehicle at the location of the stop would have impeded traffic, a decision was made to impound 

the car. Marijuana was discovered in a woman’s tote bag in the trunk of the car during an 

inventory search of the vehicle conducted as part of the impound process. The seizure of the 

marijuana during the inventory search was lawful. (South Dakota v. Opperman (1976) 428 

U.S. 364 [standard police practice of searching the inventory of a car as part of the impound 

process is not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment].)

The judgment is affirmed. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259.)

KRIEGLER, J.

We concur:

TURNER, P. J. MOSK, J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements for the period ended January 29, 2000 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-28-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-29-2000
<CASH>                                            6020
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   119467
<ALLOWANCES>                                      3519
<INVENTORY>                                      82814
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                213368
<PP&E>                                          329082
<DEPRECIATION>                                   81367
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  635111
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           116244
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            50000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         20994
<OTHER-SE>                                      175418
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    635111
<SALES>                                         198455
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                198455
<CGS>                                           162335
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   175465
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   813<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                3714
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  18463
<INCOME-TAX>                                      7296
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              11167
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     11167
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39
<FN>
<F1>Distributions on Preferred Securities
</FN>


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Tutor Perini Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kenneth R. Burk, Executive Vice President and 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 condition and results of operations of the Company.

| Date:August 7, 2009 | /s/Kenneth R. Burk                                   |
|---------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                | Kenneth R. Burk                                      |
|                | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

 

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Tutor Perini Corporation and will be retained by Tutor Perini Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.