alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CONTROL COMPONENTS, INC. and Richard E. Self, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. VALTEK, INC. and Alpha Engineering Company, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 79-1626.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 23, 1980.

Fox, Edwards & Plumb, H. Ross Workman, Salt Lake City, Utah, Pravel, Wilson & Gambrell, B. R. Pravel, Albert B. Kimball, Jr., Houston, Tex., for defendants-appellants.

Arnold, White & Durkee, Thomas O. Arnold, Houston, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellees.

Bryan & Bollo, Roland Towler Bryan, Paul Bollo, Stamford, Conn., for Control Components and Richard E. Self.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion January 8, 1980, 5 Cir., 1980, 609 F.2d 763)

Before FAY, RUBIN and HATCHETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Petition for Rehearing is DENIED and the Court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the Court and a majority of the Circuit Judges who are in regular active service not having voted in favor of it, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 16) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is also DENIED.

Before COLEMAN, Chief Judge, BROWN, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, CHARLES CLARK, RONEY, GEE, TJOFLAT, HILL, FAY, RUBIN, VANCE, KRAVITCH, FRANK M. JOHNSON, JR., GARZA, HENDERSON, REAVLEY, POLITZ, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, RANDALL, TATE, SAM D. JOHNSON and THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judges.

BROWN, Circuit Judge, with whom TJO-FLAT, RUBIN and RANDALL, Circuit Judges, join, dissenting.

It may seem incongruous that a thing ordinarily thought to be a procedural technicality should occupy the attention of the now 24 active Judges on this busy court or impose a like burden on certiorari to the Supreme Court. But this is much more than a question whether Special Interrogatories F.R.Civ.P. 49(a) (or their form) are to be used in preference to submission on a general verdict.

This case is of exceptional importance because the issues it presents arise in every jury trial of a patent case. Submitting the obviousness issue to a jury for a general verdict, in the manner our previous decisions permit, appears to me to be inconsistent with the precept that “the ultimate question of patent validity is one of law.” *Graham v. John Deere Co.,*383 U.S. 1, 86 S.Ct. 684, 15 L.Ed.2d 545 (1966). I, therefore, respectfully, dissent from the refusal to grant rehearing en banc.
#### Norman Allen GIBSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SEATTLE (WASHINGTON), DEPARTMENT OF POLICE et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 26553.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Jan. 19, 1973.

*1221Norman Allen Gibson, in pro. per.

A. L. Newbould, Charles R. Nelson, Seattle, Wash., for defendants-appellees.

Before ELY and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges, and FERGUSON,* District Judge.

*

 Honorable Warren J. Ferguson, United States District Judge, Central District of California, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm in part and reverse in part a judgment dismissing an action brought pursuant to the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S. C. § 1983.

The action alleges that the defendants seized and confiscated certain items of plaintiff’s personal property without cause but under color of state law. The district court dismissed the action as to all defendants.

The dismissal of the City of Seattle is affirmed, as that municipal defendant is not a “person” under the Civil Rights Act. Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 81 S.Ct. 473, 5 L.Ed.2d 492 (1961).

With regard to the individual defendants, the district, court held that the Act did not apply to property rights and that therefore it lacked jurisdiction. Subsequent to that determination, the Supreme Court in Lynch v. Household Finance Corp., 405 U.S. 538, 92 S.Ct. 1113, 31 L.Ed.2d 424 (1972), held that property rights as well as personal liberties are within the protection of the Civil Rights Act.

The district court dismissed the action relative to the individual defendants for the additional reason that the plaintiff had a state cause of action for common law conversion. The denial of federal jurisdiction upon that ground was rejected in Monroe v. Pape, *supra.*

The judgment with regard to the City of Seattle is affirmed. It is reversed with regard to the individual defendants.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our report dated February 16, 2006,accompanying the consolidated financial statements of QC Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries on Form 10-K as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 and for the three years in the period ended December 31, 2005. We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference of said report in the Registration Statement of QC Holdings, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-119167, effective September 21, 2004). 

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP

Kansas City, Missouri 

February 16, 2006
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OFPERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

The undersigned officer of WII Components, Inc. (the “Company”)hereby certifies that the Company’s annual report on Form 10-k for thefiscal year ended December 31, 2005 to which this certification is beingfurnished as an exhibit (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”)promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”),and the Exchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32),this certification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes ofSection 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability ofthat section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by referenceinto any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to theextent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

 
| Date: March 23, 2006 |                                            |
|----------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
|                 | /s/ Dale B. Herbst                              |   |
|                 | Name: Dale B. Herbst                            |
|                 | Title: Vice President, Treasurer, and Secretary |

 

1

----
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 Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. EG14-80-000, EG14-81-000, EG14-82-000, et al.]
 Docket Nos.Mountain Creek Power, LLC
EG14-80-000LaPorte Power, LLC
EG14-81-000Handley Power, LLC
EG14-82-000Regulus Solar, LLC
EG14-83-000Major Oak Power, LLC
EG14-84-000Green Pastures Wind I, LLC
EG14-85-000Avalon Solar Partners, LLC
EG14-86-000Energia Sierra Juarez, S. de R.L. de C.V
EG14-87-000Energia Sierra Juarez U.S. Transmission, LLC
EG14-88-000Longhorn Wind Project, LLC
EG14-89-000TX Hereford Wind, LLC
EG14-90-000Catalina Solar 2, LLC
EG14-91-000
 Take notice that during the month of October 2014, the status of the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a). Dated: November 6, 2014. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2014-26962 Filed 11-13-14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
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.                  

###### Social Security Administration

          - 20 CFR Part 404
          - [Docket No. SSA-2009-0038]
          - RIN 096-AH03

# AGENCY:

Social Security Administration.

# ACTION:

Final rule; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        This document corrects a misspelling in the regulatory language of our final rulemaking published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Friday, October 10, 2014, titled Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Genitourinary Disorders.                    

# DATES:

Effective December 9, 2014.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Cheryl A. Williams, Office of Medical Policy, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401, (410) 965-1020. For information on eligibility or filing for benefits, call our national toll-free number, 1-800-772-1213, or TTY 1-800-325-0778, or visit our Internet site, Social Security Online, at                         *http://www.socialsecurity.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On October 10, 2014 we published a final rulemaking in the                     **Federal Register**                     at 79 FR 61221. The final rulemaking contained an incorrect spelling of exstrophic. We are correcting that misspelling.                          ( print page 67350)    

## Correction

In final rule FR Doc 2014-24114 published on October 10, 2014 at 79 FR 61221, in the regulatory language section, make the following correction:

## Appendix 1 to Subpart P of Part 404—[Corrected]

1. On page 61225 in the 2nd column, in paragraph A of Listing 106.00 of Part B of Appendix 1 to Subpart P of Part 404, correct “exotrophic” to read “exstrophic”. 

Paul Kryglik,

Director, Office of Regulations and Reports Clearance, Office of Legislative and Congressional Affairs, Social Security Administration.

[FR Doc. 2014-26745 Filed 11-12-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4191-02-P
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Rachael Whitefield","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/rachaellwhitefield-2-2-2\/","title":"Randolph \u201cKomrade\u201d Bresnik","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"HOiNjAMS14\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/randolph-komrade-bresnik\/\">Randolph \u201cKomrade\u201d Bresnik<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/randolph-komrade-bresnik\/embed\/#?secret=HOiNjAMS14\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Randolph \u201cKomrade\u201d Bresnik” — NASA\" data-secret=\"HOiNjAMS14\" 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\/2016\/03\/9368145895_1a8b00e828_o-3.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":750}
No. 87-1583.

#### Vermont Department of Taxes *v.*Keys et ux.

Sup. Ct. Vt. Certiorari denied.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

** **

** **

 

 

 

** **

** CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906**

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

 

 

 In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Rotoblock Corporation (the “Company”)for the period ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

 

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

 

       2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated: April 13, 2012

  

By:/s/ Andrew P. Schneider                 

           Andrew P.Schneider

           Chief Executive Officer

  

By:/s/ Chow Chu Keung                           

            Chow Chu Keing

           Chief Financial Officer
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

____________

No. 22-30709

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Casondra Reagan, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:20-CR-21-1

______________________________

Before Jones, Haynes, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:

*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Casondra 

Reagan has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Reagan has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 29, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-30709 Document: 00516804067 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/29/2023
No. 22-30709

2

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to 

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities 

herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 22-30709 Document: 00516804067 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/29/2023
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cr−00256

Honorable Virginia M. Kendall

Brandon Pegues

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, July 9, 2020:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert as to Brandon Pegues:

Detention hearing held on 7/9/20. By agreement and consent of all the parties and

pursuant to the CARES Act, all parties appear by telephone conference. The Government

orally renewed its motion for pretrial detention on the grounds of danger to community

and risk of non−appearance. For the reasons stated on the record, the Government's oral

motion for pretrial detention is denied. Enter Order Setting Conditions of Release.

Defendant released on an unsecured bond in the amount of $4,500. Defendant shall be

released after processing. Mailed notice (ber, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cr-00256 Document #: 20 Filed: 07/09/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:51
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Survival Training","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"KP1kMVm53Y\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/survival-training\/\">Survival Training<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/survival-training\/embed\/#?secret=KP1kMVm53Y\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Survival Training” — NASA\" data-secret=\"KP1kMVm53Y\" 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\/03\/464321main_s63-08394_full.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":384}
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the AnnualReport of U.S. Premium Beef, LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the periodended August 27, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott J. Miller, Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

 

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

 

|   |   |                                                   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|
| By:    |   |  /s/ Scott J. Miller                              |
|   |   |  Scott J. Miller

* Chief Financial Officer* |

 

Date: November 16, 2011
H. Res. 265

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

October 21, 1997.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 2204) to authorize appropriations for fiscal

years 1998 and 1999 for the Coast Guard, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with.

Points of order against consideration of the bill for failure to

comply with section 401 of the Congressional Budget Act of

1974 are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill

and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled

by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. After general

debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the

five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute

rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Transportation and Infra-
2

•HRES 265 EH

structure now printed in the bill. The committee amendment

in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read.

Points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute for failure to comply with clause 7 of rule

XVI or section 401 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974

are waived. During consideration of the bill for amendment,

the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion

of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in

clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. The Chairman of the Committee of the

Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows another electronic vote without

intervening business, provided that the minimum time for

electronic voting on the first in any series of questions shall

be fifteen minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of the

bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the

bill to the House with such amendments as may have been

adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the

House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the

Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the na-
3

•HRES 265 EH

ture of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final

passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.