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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 97-10117

Summary Calendar

 

WILLIAM D. SALAZAR,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL.,

Defendants,

OWENS-ILLINOIS SALARY EMPLOYEE WELFARE BENEFIT PLAN,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:94-CV-1785-D

- - - - - - - - - -

September 22, 1997

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

William D. Salazar appeals from the grant of summary

judgment for the defendant, Owens-Illinois Salary Employee

Benefit Plan (“the Plan”), in his action under the Employee

Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Salazar contends that

this court should overrule Pierre v. Connecticut Gen. Life Ins.
2

Co., 932 F.2d 1552 (5th Cir. 1991), and hold that federal courts

should apply a de novo standard of review to factual

determinations under ERISA plans. Salazar also contends that the

Plan erred by basing its determination that he was not disabled

on the 1995 report of Dr. Charles Crane, who allegedly refused to

accept the records of surgeries performed on Salazar between 1993

and 1995.

One panel of this court cannot overrule another panel. 

United States v. Taylor, 933 F.2d 307, 313 (5th Cir. 1991). 

Salazar’s contention that this court should overrule Pierre

therefore is unavailing.

The district court did not err by granting summary judgment

for the Plan. The Plan conducted its own investigation of

Salazar’s disability claim, as it was entitled to do. Salley v.

E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 966 F.2d 1011, 1015 (5th Cir.

1992). Dr. Crane’s report indicated that he knew about the

surgeries performed on Salazar and the pain Salazar experienced;

Salazar does not indicate how Dr. Crane’s conclusions might have

been different had he accepted the records of those surgeries. 

Salazar has failed to show a disputed issue of material fact. 

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986).

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit B 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8226-2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 1 of 4
Deposition of:

Suzanne Parisian , M.D.

June 21, 2017

In the Matter of:

In Re: Bard IVC Filters Products

Liability

Veritext Legal Solutions

1075 Peachtree St. NE , Suite 3625

Atlanta, GA, 30309

800.808.4958 | calendar-atl@veritext.com | 770.343.9696

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8226-2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 2 of 4
Suzanne Parisian , M.D. June 21, 2017

In Re: Bard IVC Filters Products Liability

1 in regard to labeling; is that right?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. And if you look over at page 81, about

4 midway through, there's a sentence that begins,

5 "When Bard had the RNF...."

6 Do you see that?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. Okay.

9 A. "...cleared for the option..."?

10 Q. Yeah, that's right.

11 A. Uh-huh (affirmative).

12 Q. And -- and, specifically, it says, "When

13 Bard had the RNF cleared for the 'option' to be used

14 as a temporary I- -- IVC device, Bard continued to

15 fail to adequately and voluntarily update its

16 labeling, IFU, and warnings to include

17 recommendations for indwell time range and warnings

18 describing updated post-market risks."

19 Do you see that?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. And tell me what you meant there when you

22 said "indwell time ranges."

23 A. The length of time you would leave the

24 filter in place, which is the issue that's really

25 kind of developed with the Morales article in 2013,

Page 80

Veritext Legal Solutions

800.808.4958 770.343.9696

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8226-2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 3 of 4
Suzanne Parisian , M.D. June 21, 2017

In Re: Bard IVC Filters Products Liability

1 how long do you leave a temporary filter in place in

2 a patient.

3 Q. And is it your opinion that there should

4 have been something in the IFU for the recovery

5 filter regarding a indwell time range?

6 A. Yes, based on the design of the device and

7 what they were seeing in terms of the -- the

8 fracture of metal, the perforation, the risks that

9 they were seeing internally, the difference between

10 the Simon Nitinol filter and the recovery filter,

11 that a reasonable manufacturer would have tried to

12 have provided some guidance as to removal. And

13 that's -- that's what I'm talking about there.

14 So based on their internal documents,

15 because we know FDA cleared it. FDA cleared it as a

16 temporary option with no indwell time.

17 Q. And are you familiar with the clinical

18 data that was in the IFU for the Recovery filter

19 based on the Asch study?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. And did it contain ranges as far as when

22 those particular Recovery filters were removed?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. And was that true for the IFUs for the G2

25 device when it reported on the clinical data for the

Page 81

Veritext Legal Solutions

800.808.4958 770.343.9696

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8226-2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 4 of 4
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2331 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
                                S. 2331

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 16, 2004

               Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
                   For the relief of Fereshteh Sani.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR FERESHTEH SANI.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Fereshteh Sani shall be 
eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 
to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 
filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 
204 of that Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Fereshteh Sani enters the United 
States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), 
Fereshteh Sani shall be considered to have entered and remained 
lawfully and shall be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of enactment 
of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Numbers.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Fereshteh Sani, the Secretary 
of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the 
current or next following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant 
visas that are made available to natives of the country of birth of 
Fereshteh Sani under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act or, if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are 
made available to natives of the country of birth of Fereshteh Sani 
under section 202(e) of that Act.

            Passed the Senate October 11, 2004.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
<PAGE>
Exhibit 99.02

         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 The Student Loan Corporation (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"), I, Steven
Gorey, 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.


/s/ Steven Gorey
-----------------------------------

Steven Gorey
Chief Financial Officer
August 9, 2002


                                       20
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 200 (Thursday, October 16, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 62241]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24649]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8916]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Bridget Riley'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 
257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Bridget Riley,'' imported from abroad for 
temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural 
significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with 
the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition 
or display of the exhibit objects at The Art Institute of Chicago, 
Chicago, IL, from on or about November 11, 2014, until on or about 
March 15, 2015, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to 
be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public 
Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: October 8, 2014.
Kelly Keiderling,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2014-24649 Filed 10-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Elizabeth E. Keller","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/eekeller\/","title":"BioNutrients Flight Experiments","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"NNqbeVUh3l\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/ames\/ames-science\/ames-space-biosciences\/bionutrients-flight-experiments\/\">BioNutrients Flight Experiments<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/ames\/ames-science\/ames-space-biosciences\/bionutrients-flight-experiments\/embed\/#?secret=NNqbeVUh3l\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“BioNutrients Flight Experiments” — NASA\" data-secret=\"NNqbeVUh3l\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/astronaut-nicole-mann-works-on-the-bionutrients-2-investigation-52608177987-o.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2410

To promote wildland firefighter safety. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 11, 2004

Ms. CANTWELL (for herself and Mrs. MURRAY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL

To promote wildland firefighter safety.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Wildland Firefighter 

5 Safety Act of 2004’’. 

6 SEC. 2. WILDLAND FIREFIGHTER SAFETY. 

7 (a) DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.—In this section, the 

8 term ‘‘Secretary’’ means—

9 (1) the Secretary of the Interior, with respect 

10 to public lands (as defined in section 103 of the 

11 Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 
2

•S 2410 IS 

1 (43 U.S.C. 1702)), the surface of which is adminis2 tered by the Secretary of the Interior, acting 

3 through the Director of the Bureau of Land Man4 agement; and 

5 (2) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to 

6 land of the National Forest System (as defined in 

7 section 11(a) of the Forest and Rangeland Renew8 able Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 

9 1609(a))) administered by the Secretary of Agri10 culture, acting through the Chief of the Forest Serv11 ice. 

12 (b) FIREFIGHTER SAFETY AND TRAINING BUDG13 ET.—The Secretary shall—

14 (1) track funds expended for firefighter safety 

15 and training programs and activities; and 

16 (2) include a line item for such expenditures in 

17 each budget request submitted after the date of en18 actment of this Act. 

19 (c) ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS.—The Secre20 taries shall, on an annual basis, jointly submit to Congress 

21 a report on the implementation and efficacy of wildland 

22 firefighter safety and training programs and activities. 

23 (d) SAFETY QUALIFICATION OF PRIVATE CONTRAC24 TORS.—
3

•S 2410 IS 

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretaries shall ensure 

2 that any Federal contract or agreement entered into 

3 with a private entity for wildland firefighting serv4 ices requires the entity to provide firefighter training 

5 that is consistent with qualification standards estab6 lished by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group. 

7 (2) COMPLIANCE.—The Secretaries shall de8 velop a program to monitor and enforce compliance 

9 with the requirements of paragraph (1).

Æ
#### JETTIE RUTH STEVENS v. JACINTO HERRERA GUZMAN

No. 97PA01

(Filed 5 October 2001)

On discretionary review pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 of a unanimous decision of the Court of Appeals, 140 N.C. App. 780, 538 S.E.2d 590 (2000), dismissing plaintiffs appeal of a judgment signed 1 March 1999, an order entered 4 June 1999, and orders rendered orally on 26 February and 29 March 1999 by Ammons, J., in Superior Court, Wake County. Heard in the Supreme Court 12 September 2001.

*E. Gregory Stott for plaintiff-appellant.*

*Baker, Jenkins & Jones, P.A., by Kevin N. Lewis and Roger A. Askew; and Jodee Sparkman Larcade, for defendant-appellee.*

PER CURIAM.

DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED.

Justice EDMUNDS did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
NAC Aeronautics Committee 

Tuesday-Wednesday, February 16-17, 2009 

NASA Headquarters 

ARMD Conference Room 6B42 

Tuesday, February 16 

1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. Welcome New Committee Members and Discuss Committee 

Operations 

2:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Overview of NASA Aeronautics Programs and Discussion 

- Overall goals/objectives 

- Technical/programmatic approaches 

- Partnership strategy 

- Reviews/reporting 

5:00 p.m. Adjourn 

Wednesday, February 17 

9:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. Future direction for NASA Aeronautics and associated issues -

10:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. Break 

10:15 a.m. – 12:00 noon Future direction for NASA Aeronautics and associated issues -

Discussion 

12:00 noon – 1:00 p.m. Lunch 

1:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Committee 2010 Work Plan – review and finalization 

3:00 p.m. Adjourn
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 6755

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DONALD WHITE, a/k/a Duck , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Wheeling

. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. ( 5:15

- cr - 00037

- JPB

- JPM

- 1 )

Submitted : May 30, 2024 Decided: July 31, 2024

Before KING, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Donald White , Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Therese Conklin, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY , Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 21-6755 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/31/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM:
Donald White appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) (i) , as amended by the First Step
Act of 2018 (“FSA 2018”) , Pub. L. No. 115

- 391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. ∗

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See United States v. Davis , 99 F.4th 647, 653

- 55 , 657

- 59, 661 (4th Cir. 2024) (stating standard of review , addressing
determinations district court must make to grant relief , and addressing parameters governing district court’s consideration of factors raised for relief); Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“ The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief .”). Accordingly,

we deny White’s request for appointment of counsel and affirm the district court’s order.
United States v. White , No. 5:15

- cr - 00037

- JPB

- JPM

- 1 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 28, 202 1). 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

∗ To the extent the district court’s order addressed the standard applicable to motions for sentence reduction under § 404(b) of the FSA 2018, see 132 Stat. at 5222, we discern from White’s motion no request for such relief. USCA4 Appeal: 21-6755 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/31/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Lillian Gipson","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/lillian-gipson-1nasa-gov\/","title":"About Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration Project","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"9C5WerAls2\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/armd\/integrated-aviation-systems-program\/armd-iasp-epfd\/about-electrified-powertrain-flight-demonstration-project\/\">About Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration Project<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/armd\/integrated-aviation-systems-program\/armd-iasp-epfd\/about-electrified-powertrain-flight-demonstration-project\/embed\/#?secret=9C5WerAls2\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“About Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration Project” — NASA\" data-secret=\"9C5WerAls2\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/02\/nasa_illustration_of_mw_class_parallel_hybrid_turbo-prop_advanced_concept.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":338}
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Russell Little, Appellant

No. 06-19-00270-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 102nd District Court of 

Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

19F0597-102). Memorandum Opinion 

delivered by Chief Justice Morriss, Justice 

Burgess and Justice Stevens participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We further order that the appellant, Russell Little, pay all costs incurred by reason of this 

appeal.

RENDERED NOVEMBER 18, 2020

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### Federal Express Corporation, Respondent, v Federal Jeans, Inc., Appellant.

[788 NYS2d 113]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula J. Omansky, J.), entered December 8, 2003, awarding plaintiff damages in the principal amount of $41,762, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant received plaintiffs invoices for services rendered, and retained them without properly objecting in a reasonable amount of time. Failure to pay those invoices entitled plaintiff to judgment on an account stated *(see Manhattan Telecom. Corp. v Best Payphones,*299 AD2d 178 [2002], *lv denied*100 NY2d 507 [2003]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, the computer-generated invoices and billing records of the amounts due were *425properly admitted as business records since plaintiff established that the information contained therein was entered into the computer in the regular course of business *(see*CPLR 4518 [a]; *Gailey Co. v Wahl,*262 AD2d 985 [1999]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Williams, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.