alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-60197 Summary Calendar

AUDREY DENISE ROBERTSON, Plaintiff-Appellant

v. MINNIE COLEMAN, Lieutenant; WARDEN KEVIN JACKSON, Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:10-CV-98

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * P r o ceeding pro se, Audrey Denise Robertson, Mississippi prison e r # K9439, appeals the dismissal of her c o m p laint against prison officials for harassment. After Robertson and the Government consented to proce e d i n g before the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the magistrate judge determined t h a t Robertson failed to exhaust administrative remedies and to allege a constitutional violation. The magistrate judge dismissed her suit as frivolous. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D March 22 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-60197 Document: 00511797348 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/22/2012No. 11-60197

Robertson’s brief describes the alleged harassment, notes that the district court did not call certain witnesses to testify, and asserts that she did not receive the defendants’ motion to dismiss and was not instructed to answer it. She does not di s c u s s wh e ther she exhausted her claims or whether the defendants’ actions amounted to a constitutional violation. She also fails to cite to the district court record. The appellant’s brief must contain her “contentions and the reasons for them, with citation s t o the authorities and parts of the record on which [she] relies.” F E D
. R. AP P
. P. 28(a)(9)(A). Although we liberally construe pro se briefs, arguments must be b r i e f ed sufficiently to be preserved. Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Robertson’s failure to address the magistrate judge’s grounds for dismissing her claim s , “with o u t ev e n th e slightest identification of any error in [the district court’s] legal analysis or its application to [her] suit

. . ., is the same as if [s]he had not appealed that judgment.” Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, the appeal is D I S M ISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. See id. ; 5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2. Both the dismissal of Robertson’s suit in the district court and the dismissal of this appeal count as strikes for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 1996). Robertson is WAR NED that, once she accumulates three strikes, she may not proceed i n forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while she is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless she is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See§ 1915(g).

2 Case: 11-60197 Document: 00511797348 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/22/2012
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-2298

DORA L. ADKINS, 

Plaintiff - Appellant, 

v. 

ASHFORD TRS ALEXANDRIA, LLC, 

Defendant - Appellee. 

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

Alexandria. Patricia Tolliver Giles, District Judge. (1:22-cv-00790-PTG-WEF) 

Submitted: March 21, 2023 Decided: March 23, 2023

Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Dora L. Adkins, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2298 Doc: 27 Filed: 03/23/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM: 

Dora L. Adkins appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of 

the magistrate judge, denying her requests for leave to file an emergency complaint and for 

leave to proceed on that complaint in forma pauperis, and dismissing her case. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Adkins’ motions

for leave to amend her informal opening brief and affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. Adkins v. Ashford TRS Alexandria, LLC, No. 1:22-cv-00790-PTG-WEF 

(E.D. Va. Dec. 16, 2022). We deny Adkins’ motions to reverse and remand, for leave to 

reverse and remand, for leave to vacate and remand, to replace, for leave to replace, to 

amend, for leave to amend, and for leave to amend and moot all other motions. 

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. 

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2298 Doc: 27 Filed: 03/23/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
<PAGE>   1
                   COHERENT COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS CORPORATION



NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE- EXHIBIT 11

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              THREE MONTHS ENDED          NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                SEPTEMBER 30,               SEPTEMBER 30,
                                           ---------------------       ---------------------
                                            1997          1996          1997          1996
                                           -------       -------       -------       -------
<S>                                        <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>    
Net income available for
common stockholders                        $ 3,578       $ 2,445       $ 9,613       $ 6,843
                                           =======       =======       =======       =======

Average common shares outstanding           15,252        15,002        15,201        14,925

Average common share equivalents:
      Options                                  332           477           337           547
                                           -------       -------       -------       -------

Average number of common and
common share equivalents outstanding        15,584        15,479        15,538        15,472
                                           =======       =======       =======       =======

Net income per common share                   0.23          0.16          0.62          0.44
                                           -------       -------       -------       -------
</TABLE>



                                       12
**Exhibit** **32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

 

I, David A. Smith, President and Chief Executive Officer of PSS World Medical, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ David A. Smith

David A. Smith

President and Chief Executive Officer

 

February 8, 2006
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

The undersigned hereby certifies, in my capacity as an officer of
NSTAR, for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (i) | the enclosed Annual Report of NSTAR on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in such Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of NSTAR.
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |  |  |                                                             
|------------------------ |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|                         |  | 
|Dated: February 11, 2008 |  |  |  | /S/    JAMES J.
JUDGE                                       
|                         |  |  |  | James J. Judge                                              
|                         |  |  |  | Senior Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
#### In re Lori P. MOSER.

No. 2010-B-1777.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 24, 2010.

*271ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.*

_JjThe Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent falsely reported to her law firm that she attended a court hearing, and then submitted a report, billing records, and travel receipts to perpetuate the falsehood. Prior to the institution of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which the parties stipulated that respondent has violated Rules 1.5, 8.4(a), and 8.4(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Lori P. Moser, Louisiana Bar Roll number 25463, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day. This suspension shall be deferred in its entirety, subject to respondent’s successful completion of a two-year period of supervised probation governed by the terms and conditions set forth in the Petition for Consent Discipline. The probationary period shall commence from the date respondent, the ODC, and the probation monitor execute a formal probation plan. Any failure of respondent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred suspension executory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1, |2with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court’s judgment until paid.

*

 Chief Justice Kimball not participating in the opinion.
EXHIBIT 11

              Statement Regarding Computation of Per Share Earnings

                 Three Months Ended September 30, 2003 and 2002

                (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                            Three months ended September 30,
                                                            --------------------------------
                                                                   2003           2002
                                                               -----------    -----------

<S>                                                            <C>            <C>
Net income ...............................................     $     3,373    $     3,824
                                                               ===========    ===========

Number of shares outstanding:
Weighted average shares issued ...........................      11,900,000     11,900,000
Less: Weighted average shares held in treasury ...........       5,042,238      4,566,001
Less: Average shares held by the ESOP ....................         952,000        952,000
Plus: ESOP shares released or committed to be released
           during the fiscal year ........................         855,378        733,256
                                                               -----------    -----------
Average basic shares .....................................       6,761,140      7,115,255
Plus: Average common stock equivalents ...................         472,637        540,226
                                                               -----------    -----------
Average diluted shares ...................................       7,233,777      7,655,481
                                                               ===========    ===========

Earnings per common share:
        Basic ............................................     $      0.50    $      0.54
                                                               ===========    ===========
        Diluted ..........................................     $      0.47    $      0.50
                                                               ===========    ===========
</TABLE>


                                       23
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOUND IN THE COMPANY'S 10-Q FOR THE SIX MONTH
PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           5,971
<SECURITIES>                                    19,425
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,295
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,103
<PP&E>                                           7,047
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,142
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,660
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,235
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           157
<OTHER-SE>                                      61,989
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,660
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               120,561
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   79,287
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,517
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,148
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,369
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,369
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.40
        

</TABLE>
No. 87-1070.

#### Foreign Credit Insurance Assn. *v.*Nu-Air Manufacturing Co.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 Northfield Laboratories Inc. on Form
10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steven A. Gould, M.D.,
Chief Executive Officer of Northfield Laboratories Inc., 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 Northfield Laboratories Inc.

Date: October 11, 2004

/s/ Steven A. Gould, M.D.
----------------------------
Steven A. Gould, M.D.
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit
32.1

















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 filing of the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of South Jersey Gas Company (the “Company”) for the
period ended December 31, 2007as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edward J. Graham,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





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





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

















/s/ Edward
J.
Graham


Name: Edward J.
Graham


Title: Chief Executive
Officer


February 29, 2008
#### STATE of Louisiana v. James GEORGE, Jr.

No. 2011-KK-0383.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 8, 2011.

In re George Jr., James; —Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 12-09-0491; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2010 KW 2033.

Denied.
#### CITY OF BATON ROUGE, Parish of East Baton Rouge and the Department of Public Works v. Anthony DOUGLAS and the Personnel Board of the City of Baton Rouge, Parish of East Baton Rouge.

No. 2006-C-0675.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 16, 2011.

In re Douglas, Anthony; — Defendant; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated November 4, 2011; Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 466,636; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2004 CA1448.

Denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Quarterly Report of Northfield Laboratories Inc. on Form
10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jack J. Kogut, Chief
Financial Officer of Northfield Laboratories Inc., 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 Northfield Laboratories Inc.

Date: October 11, 2004

/s/ Jack J. Kogut
--------------------------------
Jack J. Kogut
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 11

              Statement Regarding Computation of Per Share Earnings

               Three and Nine Months Ended March 31, 2001 and 2000

                (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                 Three months ended              Nine months ended
                                                                     March 31,                       March 31,
                                                            -----------------------------   -----------------------------
                                                                2001             2000            2001           2000
                                                            -------------  --------------   -------------  --------------
<S>                                                         <C>            <C>              <C>            <C>

Net income............................................. .          $3,039         $3,224          $9,248          $9,629
                                                            =============  =============   =============   =============

Number of shares outstanding:
Weighted average shares issued......................... .      11,900,000     11,900,000      11,900,000      11,899,790
Less: Weighted average shares held in treasury......... .       3,956,429      3,379,164       3,819,752       3,196,297
Less: Average shares held by the ESOP.................. .         952,000        952,000         952,000         952,000
Plus: ESOP shares released or committed to be
          released during the fiscal year.............. .         565,766        463,749         539,622         439,508
                                                            -------------  -------------   -------------  --------------
Average basic shares................................... .       7,557,337      8,032,585       7,667,870       8,191,001
Plus: Average common stock equivalents................. .         539,156        508,033         469,570         492,855
                                                            -------------  -------------   -------------  --------------
Average diluted shares................................. .       8,096,493      8,540,618       8,137,440       8,683,856
                                                            =============  =============   =============  ==============

Earnings per common share:
        Basic.......................................... .          $0.40           $0.40           $1.21          $1.18
                                                            ============   =============   =============  =============
        Diluted........................................ .          $0.38           $0.38           $1.14          $1.11
                                                            ============   =============   =============  =============
</TABLE>