alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-31357

Conference Calendar

 

RICKEY EVANS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

WILLIE WASHINGTON, Lieutenant; BURL CAIN, 

Warden; LOUIE CALVERT; RICHARD SPINNER; 

ROBERT SCHOTT; JOHN DOE PERRY; RUBEN A. 

EVANS; JOHN DOE HUNT; LEONARD WILLIAMS,

Defendants-Appellees. 

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 98-CV-610-B

- - - - - - - - - -

August 22, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Rickey Evans, a Louisiana prisoner (# 108026), appeals the

district court’s October 20, 2000, order, which effectively

denied his FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b) motion for relief from judgment.

The court originally entered judgment dismissing Evans’ 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 civil rights action on July 28, 1999. Evans’ Rule 60(b)

motion was filed more than 14 months later.
No. 00-31357 

-2-

This court reviews the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion for

abuse of discretion. Travelers Ins. Co. v. Liljeberg Enter.,

Inc., 38 F.3d 1404, 1408 (5th Cir. 1994); Seven Elves, Inc. v.

Eskenazi, 635 F.2d 396, 402 (5th Cir. 1981). The merits of the

underlying judgment are not reviewable in an appeal from the

denial of a Rule 60(b) motion. In re Ta Chi Navigation (Panama)

Corp. S.A., 728 F.2d 699, 703 (5th Cir. 1984).

Evans’ Rule 60(b) motion cited “misapplication of state law,

mistake, misrepresentation, fraud, and plain error” as reasons

for being granted relief from judgment. Except for “plain

error,” a Rule 60(b) motion based on these reasons must be filed

within one year “after the judgment, order, or proceeding was

entered or taken.” See Rule 60(b) (one-year time bar applies to

motions based on Rule 60(b)(1), (2), and (3)). Insofar as Evans

sought relief based on those reasons, his Rule 60(b) motion was

untimely.

Evans has not purported to rely on Rule 60(b)(4) or (5). 

That leaves only Rule 60(b)(6), which provides relief for “any

other reason justifying relief from the operation of the

judgment.” Rule 60(b)(6) is the catch-all provision of Rule

60(b), the means by which a court may grant relief from judgment

when justice so requires and when the other subsections are

inapplicable. Government Fin. Servs. One Ltd. Partnership v.

Peyton Place, Inc., 62 F.3d 767, 773-74 (5th Cir. 1995). Relief

under Rule 60(b)(6) is reserved for “extraordinary”

circumstances. See Picco v. Global Marine Drilling Co., 900 F.2d

846, 851 (5th Cir. 1990). Evans has not even attempted to show
No. 00-31357 

-3-

that his case presented “extraordinary” circumstances, and we

find that no such circumstances are present. Evans has failed to

show that the district court abused its discretion in denying

Rule 60(b) relief.

AFFIRMED.
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

In connection with the Annual Report of Metals USA Holdings Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the
Periodic Report), I, C. Lourenço Gonçalves, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1. | To my knowledge, the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                         |  |  |  |                                      
|------------------------ |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated: February 20, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ C. Lourenço Gonçalves            
|                         |  |  |  | C. Lourenço Gonçalves                
|                         |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Act and
is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure statement.

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 or its staff upon request.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [FEMA-3294-EM]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for the State of Texas (FEMA-3294-EM), dated September 10, 2008, and related determinations.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         September 11, 2008.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of an emergency declaration for the State of Texas is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas for which the President declared an emergency on September 10, 2008:
      ( print page 53891)    
Bexar, Cherokee, Collin, Comal, Dallas, Denton, El Paso, Ellis, Hunt, Kaufman, Lubbock, Navarro, Smith, Van Zandt, Walker, Waller, and Wood Counties for emergency protective measures (Category B), including direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. E8-21773 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53908-53909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21496]


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

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET


Compliance Assistance Resources and Points of Contact Available 
to Small Businesses

AGENCY: Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the 
President.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 
2002 (44 U.S.C. 3520), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is 
publishing a ``list of the compliance assistance resources available to 
small businesses'' and a list of the points of contacts in agencies 
``to act as a liaison between the agency and small business concerns'' 
with respect to the collection of information and the control of 
paperwork. This information is posted on the following Web site: http://www.business.gov/contacts/federal/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wendy Liberante, Office of Information 
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget; e-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f3849f9a919681929d8796b39c9e91dd969c83dd949c85"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9aedf6f3f8ffe8fbf4eeffdaf5f7f8b4fff5eab4fdf5ec">[email protected]</span></a>; telephone: (202) 395-3647. Inquiries may be 
submitted by facsimile to (202) 395-5167.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 
2002 (Pub. L. 107-198) requires OMB to ``publish in the Federal 
Register and make available on the Internet (in consultation with the 
Small Business Administration) on an annual basis a list of the 
compliance assistance resources available to small businesses'' (44 
U.S.C. 3504(c)(6)). OMB has, with the assistance and support of the 
Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Business Gateway Program, 
assembled a list of the compliance assistance resources available to 
small businesses. This list is available today on the

[[Page 53909]]

following Web site: http://www.business.gov/contacts/federal/. There is 
also a link to this information on the OMB Web site.
    In addition, under another provision of this Act, ``each agency 
shall, with respect to the collection of information and the control of 
paperwork, establish 1 point of contact in the agency to act as a 
liaison between the agency and small business concerns'' (44 U.S.C. 
3506(i)(1)). These contacts are also available at http://www.business.gov/contacts/federal/.

Susan E. Dudley,
Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
[FR Doc. E8-21496 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
* Local Rule 47.5.1 provides: "The publication of

opinions that merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-50225 Conference Calendar

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus PABLO ARIAS PUIG, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-94-CR-178
- - - - - - - - - - December 19, 1995 Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Pablo Arias Puig pleaded guilty to attempted escape and tampering with a witness. Puig's plea agreement contained a waiver of the right of appeal. The agreement stated that Puig was aware that the sentence would be imposed in conformity with the guidelines. Puig now seeks review of the district court's sentence. The Government argues that Puig waived the right to appeal.No. 95-50225 -2- Our review of the record shows that Puig knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal the sentence imposed by the district court. United States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566, 568 (5th Cir. 1992); United States v. Portillo , 18 F.3d 290, 293 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 115 S. Ct. 244 (1994). APPEAL DISMISSED.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
   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)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the
undersigned officers of the registrant certifies, to the best of his knowledge,
that the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended
June 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Report, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.

           Dated: April 15, 2003                     /s/ Kari Stefansson
                                                     -------------------
                                                     Kari Stefansson
                                                     Chairman, President, Chief
                                                     Executive Officer

           Dated: April 15, 2003                     /s/ Lance Thibault
                                                     ------------------
                                                     Lance Thibault
                                                     Chief Financial Officer and
                                                     Treasurer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
furnished to deCODE genetics, Inc. and will be retained by deCODE genetics, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

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

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

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A0 86 6 . BRUNDI DGE v . U. S. BANK, N. A. et a l

.

Th i s ap p eal wa s d o c k e t ed o n J an u ary 2 6
, 2 0 1 6
, s u ch t h at ap p el lan t Hel en a Bru nd i d g e’ s i n i ti al b ri ef was d u e o n Feb ru ary 1 5
, 2 0 16

. Co u rt o f Ap p eal s Ru l e 2 3 (a) (ap p el l an t ’ s i n i t i al b ri ef “ s h al l be fi l ed w i t hi n 2 0 d ay s aft er t h e ap peal i s d ock et ed ”).
As o f M arch 2
, 20 1 6
, ho wev er, Bru n d i d g e had n ei t h er fi l ed a bri ef n o r as k ed fo r an

ex t en s i o n o f t i m e t o d o s o

. W e th erefo re DISM ISS th i s ap p eal

. Id

. (ap p el l an t ’ s fai l u re
t o fi le an i n i t i al b ri ef wi t h i n 2 0 d ay s o f do ck et i ng , “ u n l es s ex t en d ed u p o n m o t i o n fo r
g o o d cau s e s ho wn , m ay

res u l t i n t he d i s m i s s al o f t h e ap p eal ”).

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

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

_

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

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

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

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

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

.

, C l e r k

. 03/08/2016 March 08, 2016
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 99-10183

Summary Calendar

_____________________

VERNON L. SCHNEIDER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

LLOYD M. BENTSEN, Secretary, Department

of Treasury; NICHOLAS BRADY,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:97-CV-2783-X)

_________________________________________________________________

August 4, 1999

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Vernon L. Schneider, pro se, appeals the dismissal of his

employment discrimination claims arising out of the termination of

his employment with the Internal Revenue Service, the denial of his

motions for leave to amend his complaint, and the denial of his

motion for reconsideration. Schneider contends that the district

court erred by holding that his complaint was not timely filed and

that he had not exhausted administrative remedies.
- 2 -

Pursuant to our review of the record and briefs, we conclude

that the district court did not commit reversible error by

dismissing the complaint, denying leave to amend, and denying

reconsideration. Accordingly, the judgment and orders appealed

from are AFFIRMED. (Schneider’s motion for appointment of counsel

is DENIED.)

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 179 (Monday, September 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 53218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21390]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL08-87-000]


Electric Power Supply Association; Notice of Petition

September 8, 2008.
    Take notice that on September 2, 2008, the Electric Power Supply 
Association filed a petition pursuant to Rule 207 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.207) requesting guidance 
with respect to the question of when investments in publicly-held 
companies will be deemed to convey ``control'' or to result in 
``affiliation'' for purposes of the Commission's market-based rate 
requirements under section 205 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 
824d) and the requirements of section 203 of the Federal Power Act (16 
U.S.C. 824b) and the Commission's regulations thereunder.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Motions to 
intervene and protests must be served on the petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0b4d4e594844656762656e587e7b7b64797f4b6d6e7968256c647d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="40060512030f2e2c292e25133530302f323400262532236e272f36">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 30, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-21390 Filed 9-12-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 4.17



 Exhibit 4.17 
  
 Schedule 
 Setting Forth Information on 
 Twenty Additional and Substantially Identical Assignments of Leases, Rents and Profits 
  
 (Except as set forth below, documents are substantially identical to the

 document included as Exhibit 4.16 of this filing, except for immaterial variations) 
  

								
	 Location

	  	 Assignor (Preamble)

	  	 Principal Sum
 (Recitals)

	  	 Pool Number
 (Cover Page)


	 Greensboro, North Carolina
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	4,875,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Lubbock, Texas
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	2,500,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Akron/Copley Ohio
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	5,460,000.00	  	Pool 1
	 Kalamazoo, Michigan
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	3,938,000.00	  	Pool 1
	 Clearwater/St. Petersburg, Florida
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	3,540,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Boston/Danvers, Massachusetts
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	4,620,000.00	  	Pool 1
	 Irvine, California
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	12,750,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Arcadia, California
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	14,850,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Chicago-Deerfield, Illinois
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	8,100,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Memphis, Tennessee
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	2,535,000.00	  	Pool 1
	 Birmingham, Alabama
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	5,573,000.00	  	Pool 1

  










								
	 Placentia, California
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	7,650,000.00	  	Pool 1
	 Pensacola, Florida
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	3,540,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Santa Fe, New Mexico
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	8,050,000.00	  	Pool 1
	 Boca Raton, Florida
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	3,750,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Columbia/Spartanburg, South Carolina
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	4,380,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Philadelphia/Berwyn, Pennsylvania
	  	 Marriott Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	5,979,000.00	  	Pool 2
	 Las Vegas, Nevada
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	20,625,000.00	  	Pool 1
	 Shreveport/Bossier City, Louisiana
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	4,050,000.00	  	Pool 1
	 Jackson, Mississippi
	  	 AHT Residence Inn II Limited Partnership
	  	$	3,360,000.00	  	Pool 1
Case 1:05-cv-00170-JD   Document 25   Filed 09/07/06   Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

SABRINA WARD,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, 

INC., TRANS UNION, LLC, and EQUIFAX 

INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC,

Defendants.

8:23CV212

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ Stipulations of Dismissal with 

Prejudice of Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC (Filing No. 51) and Defendant 

Trans Union, LLC (Filing No. 52). The Court, being advised in the premises, finds that

such an Order is proper.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Equifax Information Services LLC and Trans 

Union LLC be dismissed with prejudice with each party to bear their own fees and costs.

Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. remains a party in this action.

Dated this 5th day of December, 2023.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Joseph F. Bataillon

Senior United States District Judge

8:23-cv-00212-JFB-MDN Doc # 53 Filed: 12/05/23 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 152