alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"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":"Robert A. Pearce","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"ITmcqCVWh9\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/robert-a-pearce\/\">Robert A. Pearce<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/robert-a-pearce\/embed\/#?secret=ITmcqCVWh9\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Robert A. Pearce” — NASA\" data-secret=\"ITmcqCVWh9\" 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\/2019\/12\/bob-pearce2_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":762}
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

*CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERCERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350*

 

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of Granite City Food & Brewery Ltd. (the “Company”) onForm 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended September 26, 2004, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Steven J. Wagenheim, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

2.                                       the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
| Dated: | November 1, 2004 | By     | /s/ Steven J. Wagenheim                |   |
|--------|------------------|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|   |             |   | Steven J. Wagenheim                    |
|   |             |   | President and 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
  1)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.
 /s/ William J. SimsWilliam J. SimsChief Executive Officer/s/ David K. JohnsonDavid K. JohnsonChief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,299
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           4,738
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      5,058
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          73,643
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            70,325
<LOANS>                                        155,356
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,031
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 255,030
<DEPOSITS>                                     197,820
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,249
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      36,256
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 255,030
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  9,551
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,919
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   866
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                13,268
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 798
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,537
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,138
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,459
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,138
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,138
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,917
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.33
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.98
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,946
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,031
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,031
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,031
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 13.1

Certification by the Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002

In connection with the annual report of Spreadtrum Communications, Inc. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the
year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Leo Li, Chief Executive 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 to my knowledge:

(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: June 30, 2009



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Leo Li                           
|Leo Li                               
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|Spreadtrum Communications, Inc.      

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 United States Code Section
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report.
#### Henry Moore *v. V.*Davis.

Judgment — Correction of Mistakes in.

Courts will, by proper proceeding, correct mistakes innocently made by parties in the settlement of their accounts.

Same.

A judgment against a defendant, who did not resist the action, cannot be revised for alleged mistakes, in a separate action, and resulting from the plaintiff’s own lack of diligence.

APPEAL PROM JEEEERSON CIRCUIT COURT, CHY. DIV.

May 1, 1871.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Lindsey:

The petition in this canse discloses upon its face that the amount sought to be recovered is part of the rent claim which constituted the cause of action in another suit between the same parties, in which a judgment was rendered in favor of the appellee without resistance on the part of appellant for the full amount claimed. It is alleged, however, that by mistake of the appellee’s attorney, but without any fault whatever upon the part of the appellant, a credit of fifty dollars was erroneously entered upon the account sued on before judgment, and heuce that the judgment was for a •less sum than was really due. And appellee seeks to he relieved against the consequences of his own mistake, by a second judgment for the balance still claimed to be due.

Courts will in proper proceedings correct mistakes innocently made by parties in the settlement of their accounts. They will correct judgments erroneously entered when there is anything in the record from which the correction can be made, also when the judgment, was procured by fraud, or where it was rendered for less than was due, by reason of the mistake of the palintiff super-induced by anything done by the other party, or even when both parties are innocent of intentional wrong, when the mistake was such as could not have been discovered by the use of reasonable vigilance. But it is a general rule that the judgment “of a court of competent jurisdiction, is not only final as to all matters deter*40mined by it, but is also *' * * final as to every other matter incident to the cause and which the parties might have put. in issue and had litigated.” This rule is founded in reason and propriety. It imports only the exercise of reasonable vigilance; tends to advance the ends of justice; to quiet the contentions of society, and to put an end to vexatious litigation, *“Talbott v. Todd, 5th*Dana, *193.”*

*Dembiiz &*Wehle, *for appellant.*

Eastin, *for appellee.*

Tested by this rule it seems to us the petition presents no cause of action. The amount in controversy might and ought to have been recovered in the former action, and if the appellee or his attorney had exercised reasonable vigilance, no mistake would have occurred. The demurrer to the petition should have been sustained, and as the evidence in the case shows that it cannot be so amended as to present a cause of action the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded, with instructions to dismiss the proceeding.
EXHIBIT A

Case: 1:20-cv-02227 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 04/09/20 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:6
Case: 1:20-cv-02227 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 04/09/20 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:7
Case: 1:20-cv-02227 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 04/09/20 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:8
Case: 1:20-cv-02227 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 04/09/20 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:9
Case: 1:20-cv-02227 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 04/09/20 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:10
ILND 450 (Rev. 10/13) Judgment in a Civil Action

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

John Tezak,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

Live Nation Entertaiment, Inc. et al ,

Defendant(s).

Case No. 20 cv 2482

Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman 

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

Judgment is hereby entered (check appropriate box):

in favor of plaintiff(s)

and against defendant(s)

in the amount of $ ,

which includes pre–judgment interest. 

does not include pre–judgment interest.

Post-judgment interest accrues on that amount at the rate provided by law from the date of this judgment. 

Plaintiff(s) shall recover costs from defendant(s).

in favor of defendant(s) Live Nation Entertaiment, Inc., Ticketmaster Entertainment LLC, 

Ticketmaster Entertainment, Inc.

and against plaintiff(s) John Tezak.

.

Defendant(s) shall recover costs from plaintiff(s).

other:

This action was (check one):

tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has rendered a verdict. 

tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision was reached. 

decided by Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman on a motion to compel arbitration. 

Date: 3/10/2021 Thomas G. Bruton, Clerk of Court

Yvette Montanez , Deputy Clerk

Case: 1:20-cv-02482 Document #: 29 Filed: 03/10/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:190
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7554

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus CLARENCE BRITT, Claimant - Appellant, and $1,014,509 IN UNITED S TATES CURRENCY; $2,279.97 IN VARIOUS UNITED STATES CURRENCY AND COIN; ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY, located at 2307 Armstead Avenue; ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY, located at 450 Algonquin Road, Hampton, Virginia; ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY, located at 10 Waterview Point, Hampton, Virginia; ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY, located at 115 BowenDrive, Hampton, Virginia; ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY, 1123 41st Street, Newport news, Virginia; ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY, 1105 Faubus Drive, Newport News, Virginia; ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY, 1115 32nd Street, Newport News, Virginia; ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY, 1212 31st Street, Newport News, Virginia; LANGLEY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION BANK ACCOUNT NO. 99678; FIRST VIRGINIA BANK OF TIDEWATER ACCOUNT NO. 55405894; NAVAL AIR FEDERAL CREDIT UNION ACCOUNT NO. 493573; SIGNET BANK, Account No. 0028873081; SIGNET BANK, Account No. 7540514416; SIGNET BANK, Account No. 0030495055; SIGNET BANK, Account No. 0028867059; SIGNET BANK, Account No. 7261362755; SIGNET BANK, Account No. 003049436; EIGHT PROMISSORY NOTES FOR $50,000.00 EACH; Defendants,23 MARYLAND EVERETT BRITT; SIGNET BANK/VIRGINIA, Claimants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-90-350-4, CA-90-351-4, CA-90-373-4) Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: May 29, 1996 Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clarence Britt, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Anthony Exley, Kent Pendleton Porter, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).4 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Britt , No. CA-90-350-4; CA90-351-4; CA-90-373-4 (E.D. Va. Sept. 12, 1995). We dispense withoral 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
9209.

#### Powell *v.*Wilkerson.

Wade, C. J„

The judge of the superior court did not err in dismissing the certiorari for the reason that the petition therefor sought to review alleged error in the trial of two separate cases in a justice’s court, which were alleged to have been tried together by consent. The answer of the magistrate distinctly denied that the two cases (an illegality case and a claim ease) were tried by the jury by consent, alleging, to the contrary, "that plea of illegality was not tried by jury, that jury was- excluded from the room during the trial of illegality and had nothing whatever to do with it,” and “that counsel for plaintiff and defendant agreed to submit the claim .to a jury without being tried by the *56justice of the peace.” The traverse to the answer alleges that “the defendant in the court below insisted upon his illegality, but passed the same to a jury to be tried and passed upon by them,” but does not deny the distinct statement “that plea of illegality was not tried by jury, that jury was excluded from the room during the trial of illegality, and had nothing whatever to do with it.” Something more than an inferential traverse is requisite; and while it may be inferred that perhaps the plaintiff in certiorari intended to traverse this entire statement made by the magistrate, he did not in fact explicitly deny the allegation that the jury did not consider the illegality (and hence that the two cases were not tried together) ; and the traverse must be strictly construed. The certiorari seeks to review two distinct cases, one of which was not submitted to the jury by consent or otherwise.

Decided March 14, 1918.

Certiorari; from Berrien superior court—Judge Thomas. August 11, 1917.

Hendricks, *Mills & Hendricks,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. J. Murray,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed,*

*Jenkins and' Luke, JJ., concur.*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Wendy K. Avedisian","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/wavedisi\/","title":"Veteran Astronaut Karen Nyberg Retires from NASA","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"llJcNOg5Ki\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/veteran-astronaut-karen-nyberg-retires-from-nasa\/\">Veteran Astronaut Karen Nyberg Retires from NASA<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/veteran-astronaut-karen-nyberg-retires-from-nasa\/embed\/#?secret=llJcNOg5Ki\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Veteran Astronaut Karen Nyberg Retires from NASA” — NASA\" data-secret=\"llJcNOg5Ki\" 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\/03\/karen_nyberg_in_cupola_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":398}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Mark A. Garcia","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/markagarcia\/","title":"What You Need to Know about NASA\u2019s SpaceX Crew-8 Mission","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"iQuI2OHNC8\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/station\/commercial-crew\/what-you-need-to-know-about-nasas-spacex-crew-8-mission\/\">What You Need to Know about NASA\u2019s SpaceX Crew-8 Mission<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/station\/commercial-crew\/what-you-need-to-know-about-nasas-spacex-crew-8-mission\/embed\/#?secret=iQuI2OHNC8\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“What You Need to Know about NASA\u2019s SpaceX Crew-8 Mission” — NASA\" data-secret=\"iQuI2OHNC8\" 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\/2023\/10\/jsc2023e070781-1.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":480}
Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter Citation Limited Pursuant to 1st Cir. Loc. R. 32.3 

# United Stat es Court of Appeals

For the First C ircuit

No. 03-1456 MARC RICHARD ADAMS, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v. COMMISSIONER, NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE [Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro, U.S. District Judge ] Before Torruella, Selya and Lipez, Circuit Judges .

Marc Richard Adams on brief pro se. Peter W. Heed , Attorney Ge ner al and Nancy J. Smith , Senior Assistant Attorney General, on brief for appellees.
November 17, 2003-2-

Per Curiam . Pro se inmate Marc Adams appeals the district court's dismissal of his civil rights complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, as requir ed by the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), 42 U.S.C § 1997e(a). We have reviewed the recordand the parties' submissions and conclude that, contrary to appellant's contentions, the district court applied the proper standards of law andcorrectly concluded that appellant had failed to exhaust his PLRA remedies. To the extent appellant argues that defendants waived or should have bee n estopped from asserting the failure-to-exhaust defense, his arguments are legally and factually unfounded. Affirmed . See Loc. R. 27(c).