alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* The Honorable Mark Bennett, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 03-2219

___________ Monica Miller, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Northern v. * District of Iowa. * Wells Dairy Inc. doing business as * [UNPUBLISHED] Wells Blue Bunny, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: March 11, 2004 Filed: March 18, 2004

___________ Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Monica Miller suffers from a knee condition that impairs her ability to climb stairs, kneel, squat, or bend her knees. After Wells Blue Bunny terminated her employment as a full-time quality control laboratory technician, Miller brought a disability discrimination action against Wells. The district court * granted summary judgment to Wells concluding Miller had not generated genuine issues of material-2- fact that would allow a jury to find she was actually disabled or perceived as disabled. Miller v. Wells Dairy, Inc. , 252 F. Supp. 2d 799, 806-11 (N.D. Iowa 2003). Miller appeals arguing the district court committed error in deciding as a matter of law that she did not establish a prima facie case of actual or perceived disability. Having carefully reviewed the record and the applicable law, we conclude the district court properly analyzed Miller’s claims and appropriately granted summary judgment. Because we have nothing to add to the district court’s thorough analysis, we affirm on the basis of the district court’s published opinion. See 8 th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND BALANCE SHEETS (UNAUDITED) AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           763,771
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      12,007
<MORTGAGE>                                      94,254
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 941,283
<CASH>                                          10,684
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         264,096
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,396,920
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                948,959
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                              4,529
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       8
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 85,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,500
<OTHER-SE>                                     370,146
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,396,920
<PREMIUMS>                                           0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             13,883
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                  47
<OTHER-INCOME>                                  20,140
<BENEFITS>                                      37,059
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      4,722
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           (10,003)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    678
<INCOME-TAX>                                       622
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 56 
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        56
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        







</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM  THE  CONDENSED
STATEMENTS  OF  OPERATIONS  AND  CONDENSED  BALANCE  SHEETS  (UNAUDITED)  AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           818,868
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            0
<EQUITIES>                                     11,815
<MORTGAGE>                                     103,903
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 987,255
<CASH>                                         16,568
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             17,308
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         618,208
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 10,814,532
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                999,856
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            6,603
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 87
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                245,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       2,500
<OTHER-SE>                                     555,945
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   10,814,532
<PREMIUMS>                                     0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            15,992
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             (1,309)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 43,514
<BENEFITS>                                     56,059
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    17,730
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           (24,180)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                3,511
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,621
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,890
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,890
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        0



</TABLE>
Handbook 44 - 2007 

Foreword 

Handbook 44 was first published in 1949, having been preceded by similar handbooks of various designations and in 

several forms, beginning in 1918. 

Handbook 44 is published in its entirety each year following the Annual Meeting of the National Conference on Weights 

and Measures (NCWM). The Committee on Specifications and Tolerances of the NCWM developed the 2007 Edition 

with the assistance of the Weights and Measures Division (WMD) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

(NIST). This handbook includes amendments endorsed by the 91st National Conference on Weights and Measures during 

its Annual Meeting in 2006. 

NIST has a statutory responsibility for "cooperation with the states in securing uniformity of weights and measures laws 

and methods of inspection." In partial fulfillment of this responsibility, NIST is pleased to publish these 

recommendations of the NCWM. 

This handbook conforms to the concept of primary use of SI (metric) measurements recommended in the Omnibus Trade 

and Competitiveness Act of 1988 by citing SI units before inch-pound units where both units appear together and placing 

separate sections containing requirements in SI units before corresponding sections containing requirements in inchpound units. In some cases, however, trade practice is currently restricted to the use of inch-pound units; therefore, some 

requirements in this handbook will continue to specify only inch-pound units until the NCWM achieves a broad 

consensus on the permitted SI units. 

In accord with NIST policy, the meter/liter spellings are used in this document. However, the metre/litre spellings are 

acceptable, and are preferred by the NCWM. 

It should be noted that a space has been inserted instead of commas in all numerical values greater than 9999 in this 

document, following a growing practice, originating in tabular work, to use spaces to separate large numbers into groups 

of three digits. This avoids conflict with the practice in many countries to use the comma as a decimal marker. 

iii
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 28, 2024

NO. 03

- 24

- 00076

- CV

Rickye Henderson , Appellant

v.

Ali Arabzadegan , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUS TICES TRIANA AND KELL Y

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the order sign ed by the tr i a l court on January 5, 2024 . Having reviewed

the record , the Court holds that Rickye Henderson has not prosecuted his appeal a nd did not

comply with a notice from the C lerk of this C ourt

. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal for

want of prosec ution. The appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court

and in the court below.
9879.

#### Clark *v.*Jackson.

Decided January 15, 1919.

Exceptions -to auditor’s report; from city court of Kichmond county—Judge Black. May 2, 1918.

*William H.*Fleming, for plaintiff in error.

*M. G. Barwick, A. R. Williamson,*contra.

Wade, C. J.

1. Taking into consideration the nature and form of the exceptions to the auditor’s report which were presented hy the defendant in the lower court, in the light of the particular facts of this case there is no merit in the various assignments of error, including that relating to the failure of the trial judge to pass upon certain exceptions denominated exceptions of law.

2. The errors appearing in the judgment as finally entered' up, being obviously typographical, may be corrected by proper amendment. Civil Code (1910), § 5697.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenkins and Luke, JJ., concur.*
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerry DECKARD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-40150.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Dec. 8, 2004.

*351John Malcolm Bales, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Lisa G. Flournoy, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Evelyn Graham Rodriguez, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Defendant-Appellant Jerry Deckard appeals following his conditional guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute more than 500 grams of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and felon in possession of ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Deckard argues that the district court erroneously denied his motion to suppress evidence.

In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant, we determine: (1) whether the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies; and (2) if not, whether probable cause supported the warrant. *United States v. Cavazos,*288 F.3d 706, 709 (5th Cir.2002). Deckard argues that the good-faith exception does not apply because the affidavit on which the search warrant was based was so lacking in indicia of probable cause that no reasonable officer could rely on the warrant in good faith.

The warrant affidavit indicated that the police had learned from two confidential informants that Deckard was a substantial cocaine supplier and that one of the informants had delivered cocaine to Deckard’s residence within the previous two years. The affidavit also indicated that the police had been investigating Deckard for six months, and stated that within hours before applying for the warrant, the officers personally examined abandoned trash placed at the curb of Deckard’s residence and discovered materials used in the packaging of narcotics. In addition, a field test for cocaine residue proved positive, and the police had discovered correspondence, bills, and a prescription bottle in the names of Deckard and his girlfriend, thereby linking the trash to Deckard. Deckard’s challenge to the warrant affidavit is without merit, and the district court did not err in denying the suppression motion. *See United States v. Satterwhite,*980 F.2d 317, 321 (5th Cir.1992); *United States v. Raborn,*872 F.2d 589, 596 (5th *352Cir.1989); *United States v. May,*819 F.2d 531, 536 (5th Cir.1987).

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
* 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. 97-40999

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BENITO PEREZ-SANCHEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-97-CR-107-1

- - - - - - - - - -

February 11, 1998

Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Benito Perez-Sanchez appeals his guilty-plea conviction for

illegal entry after deportation, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Perez-Sanchez argues that he was charged and pleaded guilty to

the elements of simple reentry, but was sentenced as if he had

been convicted of all the elements of § 1326(b)(2) for illegal

reentry with a previous aggravated felony conviction. PerezSanchez’s argument is foreclosed by United States v. VasquezOlvera, 999 F.2d 943, 946-47 (5th Cir. 1993). 

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit
32.1





Written
Statement of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer


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





Each of
the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, of
Grande Communications, Inc., hereby certifies that, on the date
hereof:





1.
            The
      annual report on Form 10-K of Grande Communications Holdings, Inc. for the
      period ending December 31, 2007 filed on the date hereof with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934; and





2.
            Information
      contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of Grande Communications
      Holdings, Inc.








Date:
      March 31, 2008
            /s/ Roy H. ChestnuttRoy
      H. Chestnutt
              President,
      Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of the
  Board





Date:
      March 31, 2008
            /s/ Michael L. WilfleyMichael
      L. Wilfley
              Chief
      Financial Officer





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document. This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to
liability under that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or
the Exchange Act except to the extent this Exhibit 32 is expressly and
specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.
Exhibit 10.10    December 18,
2008  Mitchell J. Pulwer 2609 Houston Branch Road Charlotte, NC 28273  Dear Mitch:  Due to recent changes in
federal tax law, the severance provision in your April 4, 2006, offer
letter must be revised to be made compliant with Section 409A of the
Internal Revenue Code.  Please sign where
indicated below to acknowledge that your offer letter shall be amended hereby
to provide that all severance payments to which you may become entitled
pursuant thereto will paid in 9 monthly installments immediately following your
involuntary separation from service without cause (as defined in Treasury
Regulation 1.409A-1(n)(1)).  Please acknowledge your
acceptance of this amendment by signing below and returning this letter to
me.  If you have any questions regarding
this required amendment, please do not hesitate to contact me.  Regards,   /s/ John OMalleyName:
  John OMalleyTitle:
  VP Human ResourcesPolypore
  International, Inc.Agreed and Accepted:/s/ Mitchell J. PulwerMitchell J. PulwerDate: Dec. 18,
  2008
JA

FILED

AUG 13 2020ra

THOMAS G BRUTON

CTERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

TERRANCE P. LINK

NO aACR 495 )

)

)

)

)

Violation: 26 U.S.C. S 7206(1)

rhe uNITED srArES ATToRNEY charges: MAGTSTHATE JUDGT C0tE

TIDGITOUI

On or about October 15, 2017, at Chicago, in the Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division, and elsewhere,

TERRANCE P. LINK,

defendant herein, willfully made and subscribed, and caused to be made and

subscribed, a United States Individual Income Tax Return (Form 1040 with

schedules and attachments) for the calendar year 2016, which return was verified by

written declaration that it was made under penalties of perjury and was filed with

the Internal Revenue Service, which return he did not believe to be true and correct

as to every material matter, in that said return reported on Line 22 that the total

income was $264,450, when defendant knew that the total income substantially

exceeded that amount;

In violation of Tit1e 26, United States Code, Section 7206(l).

Digitally signed by AMARJEET

AMARJEET BHACHU sHaCHu

Date: 2020.08.1 2 I 7: l8:28 -05'00'

Signed by Amarjeet S. Bhachu

on behalf of the

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
0335.081980 (207) RMC/WWE No. 397

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

McDONALD’S CORPORATION, )

McDONALD’S USA, LLC, LEXI )

MANAGEMENT, LLC, and DAK4, )

LLC, )

) No. 20-cv-5057

Plaintiffs, )

) Judge Charles P. Kocoras

v. )

) Magistrate Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert

AUSTIN MUTUAL INSURANCE )

COMPANY, )

)

Defendant. )

DEFENDANT’S RULE 12(b)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendant, Austin Mutual Insurance Company, by its attorneys, Robert Marc

Chemers and William W. Elinski of Pretzel & Stouffer, Chartered, moves this Honorable

Court, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), to dismiss Plaintiffs’

Complaint in its entirety. In support hereof, Plaintiff submits its Memorandum of Law.

/s/ Robert Marc Chemers

Robert Marc Chemers, Bar Number: 0431508

rchemers@pretzel-stouffer.com

William W. Elinski, Bar Number: 6257058

welinski@pretzel-stouffer.com

PRETZEL & STOUFFER, CHARTERED

One South Wacker Drive, Suite 2500

Chicago, Illinois 60606

Telephone: (312) 346-1973

Fax: (312) 346-8242

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case: 1:20-cv-05057 Document #: 22 Filed: 10/08/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:435
Exhibit 32.2



                                  CERTIFICATION


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, the undersigned  officer of ING USA Annuity
and Life  Insurance  Company  (the  "Company")  hereby  certifies  that,  to the
officer's knowledge, the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended September 30, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the  requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d),  as applicable,  of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934
and that  the  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Company.


                                       By:/s/ Jacques de Vaucleroy
November 12, 2004                         --------------------------------------
-----------------                             Jacques de Vaucleroy
     (Date)                                   Director and President
Exhibit 31.2NOVELLUS SYSTEMS, INC.CERTIFICATION     I, John Chenault, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Novellus Systems, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Dated: August 5, 2005 By:  /s/ John Chenault    John Chenault    Vice President and Chief