alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Kurt C. BALLENGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Virginia BALLARD and Joe Johnson, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 05-4315.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

June 22, 2006.

Kurt C. Ballenger, Taylorsville, UT, pro se.

Before HENRY, BRISCOE, and O’BRIEN, Circuit Judges.*

*

 After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. *See*Fed. R.App P. 34(a)(2); *10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).*The ease is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT**

ROBERT H. HENRY, Circuit Judge.

Kurt C. Ballenger, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s sua sponte dis*745missal of his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state claim upon which relief may be granted. Mr. Ballenger has moved to proceed in forma pauperis. We grant his motion to proceed in forma pauperis. However, upon de novo review and construing his allegations liberally, *see Hall v. Bellmon,*935 F.2d 1106, 1109 (10th Cir.1991), we conclude for substantially the same reasons set forth in the district court’s order that Mr. Ballenger has failed to state a claim and that it would be futile to allow him to amend his complaint. *See Perkins v. Kansas Dep’t of Corr.,*165 F.3d 803, 806 (10th Cir.1999).

In his complaint, Mr. Ballenger alleges that he was unfairly treated and eventually discharged by Little Caesar Enterprises, his former employer. The district court construed his complaint as alleging discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213. However, as the district court noted, the only defendants named in Mr. Ballenger’s complaint, Virginia Ballard and Joe Johnson, are two individuals who allegedly worked as his supervisors. “The ADA precludes personal capacity suits against individuals who do not otherwise qualify as employers under the statutory definition.” *Butler v. City of Prairie Village,*172 F.3d 736, 744 (10th Cir.1999).

Moreover, Mr. Ballenger “does not allege that the reason for his discharge was the result of anything but the lack of his having a required permit and failing to communicate with his employer while he was off work for not having the permit.” Dist. Ct.Order, at 5-6. Thus, even if he had named his former employer as a defendant, these allegations do not raise an inference that he was discharged or suffered any other adverse personnel action because of a disability covered by the ADA.

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal of Mr. Ballenger’s complaint.

**

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. *745The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of *10th Cir. R. 36.3.*
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

M.C., the mother,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES,

Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 1931

[ October 20, 2017 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm

Beach County ; Howard H. Harrison , Judge; L.T. Case No. 50

- 2015

- DP

300295

- XXXX

- MB

.

Gary L. Pickett, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Meridith K. Hall, Bradenton, for appellee.

Sara E. Goldfarb, Sanford, for Guardian ad Litem Program.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

L EVINE

, F ORST and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2120 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent Agencies, 

Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent Agencies, Allowances and Office Staff for 

Former Presidents for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES, ALLOWANCES AND 

5 OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS 

6 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for Independent Agencies, Allowances and Office 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2120 IH

1 Staff for Former Presidents for fiscal year 2024 may not 

2 exceed $4,796,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**SYMBION, INC.**

 

**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 Report of Symbion, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Teresa F. Sparks, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct 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)    |   | To the best of my knowledge information contained in  the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition  and results of operations of the Company. |

 

 
|   | /s/ Teresa F. Sparks                                          |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Teresa F. Sparks                                              |
|   | Senior Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial  Officer |

 

 

Date: March 30,2009

 

----
##### 



EXHIBIT 23.1  Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm AdStar, Inc. and Subsidiary
Marina Del Rey, California We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8
(No. 333-88848) and Forms S-3 (Nos. 333-109757, 333-11943 , 333-114913, 333-60664, 333-81338 and
333-91568) of AdStar, Inc. and Subsidiary of our report dated March 11, 2005, relating to the
consolidated financial statements, which appear in this Form 10-KSB. /s/  BDO Seidman, LLP
BDO Seidman, LLP Los Angeles, California
March 31, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2168 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2168

     To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for U.S. 
Department of Interior, National Park Service, Construction for fiscal 
                               year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for U.S. 
Department of Interior, National Park Service, Construction for fiscal 
                               year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 
              INTERIOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, CONSTRUCTION FOR FISCAL 
              YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for U.S. Department of 
Interior, National Park Service, Construction for fiscal year 2024 may 
not exceed $225,984,000.
                                 <all>
```
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.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 8983]

# 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, and 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 “Latin America in Construction: Architecture 1955-1980,” 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 Museum of Modern Art, New York, New York, from on or about March 29, 2015, until on or about July 19, 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 imported objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

Dated: December 18, 2014.

Kelly Keiderling,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2014-30235 Filed 12-23-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
**EXHIBIT 23.3**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

 

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Registration No.:333-105557), Form S-3 (Registration No.: 333-112623) and Form S-4 (RegistrationNo.: 333-107801) of Medis Technologies Ltd. of our report dated February 26,2004, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of MedisTechnologies Ltd. included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the yearended December 31, 2003.

 

 
|             | Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer     |
|------------------|--------------------------------------|
|             |                                 |
|             | A MEMBER OF ERNST & YOUNG GLOBAL |
|             |
|             |
| Tel Aviv, Israel |
| March 11, 2004   |

 

----
No. 16,506.

#### Harbin *v.*The State.

Filed February 25, 1893.

From the Daviess Circuit Court.

*F. M. Clarke, C. S. Dobbins*and *A. J. Padgett,*for appellant.

McCabe, *J.*

This case is the same in every substantial respect as the case of *Ledgerwood*v. *State,*134 Ind. _, except the name of the appellant, and for the reasons given there, and on the authority of that case, the judgment in this case is affirmed.
#### Felix Poplawski, Respondent, *v.*Lola M. Cook, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

March 19, 1925.

Trial — examination of witnesses through interpreter — trial suspended where competent interpreter cannot be secured.

Where the examination of witnesses must be conducted through an interpreter, the services of a competent and qualified one should be secured, and where this is impossible, the trial should be suspended and the case remanded to the calendar.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan, Fourth District, in favor of plaintiff.

*Morris Spevack [Hyman E. Kamen*of counsel], for the appellant.

*Smith, Heymsfeld & Weiss [Nicholas A. Heymsfeld*and *David T. Smith*of counsel], for the respondent.

Per Curiam:

One of the essential elements in the proper conduct of a trial in our courts is a fair opportunity to examine witnesses and cross-examine them in order to arrive at the truth of the facts which are the basis of the litigation. Where the examination must be necessarily conducted through an interpreter, the services of a competent and a qualified one should be secured, because it is through a competent and qualified interpreter that the truth can be arrived at. If in this case it was impossible, as the record *669shows, to secure one, then the trial should have been suspended and the case remanded to the calendar. *(Mennella*v. *Metropolitan Street Railway Co.,*43 Misc. 5.) The motion for withdrawal of a juror made by the defendant should have been granted.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Bijur, Mullan and Cotillo, JJ.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

CHANCY MALLORY

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 2458

[October 17, 2018 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Martin S. Fein, Judge;

L.T. Case No. 14006917 CF10A

.

Chancy Mallory, Bristol, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Dismissed. See Oser v. State, 699 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 4 th DCA 1997).

G ERBER

, C.J., L EVINE and F ORST

, JJ., concur

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2151 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent Agencies, 

US Tax Court for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for 

Independent Agencies, US Tax Court for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES, US TAX COURT 

5 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for Independent Agencies, US Tax Court for fiscal 

9 year 2024 may not exceed $51,515,000. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Exhibit
10.11  AMENDMENT
NO.  2 TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT  This Amendment No. 2
to Consulting Agreement is entered into as of April 21, 2009 by and between
International Rectifier Corporation (Company), having a principal place of
business at 233 Kansas Street, El Segundo, California 90245, and Pahl
Consulting, Inc., with a place of business at 703 Pier Avenue, Suite B712,
Hermosa Beach, California 90254 (Consultant).  R E C I T A L S  WHEREAS, Company and
Consultant have previously entered into a certain Consulting Agreement
effective as of April 16, 2008 (Consulting Agreement), pursuant to which
the Company retained Consultant as an independent contractor consultant, and
Consultant acted in such capacity, to provide the Company certain consulting
services, all on the terms and conditions set forth therein;  WHEREAS, Company and
Consultant have previously entered into a certain Amendment No. 1 to
Consulting Agreement entered into as of October 16, 2008, pursuant to
which the Company and Consultant extended the term of the Consulting  Agreement;  WHEREAS, Company and
Consultant wish to further amend the term of the Consulting Agreement.  NOW, THEREFORE, the
parties hereto agree as follows:  The first sentence of Section 4
is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:  The term of this
Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and terminate on December 31,
2009 (Term).  Except as expressly set
forth herein, the Consulting agreement remains unmodified and in full force and
effect.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above.  International Rectifier
  Corporation
  
  Pahl
  Consulting, Inc.By:
  
  
  By:Name:
  Ilan Daskal
  
  
  Linda J. PahlTitle:
  Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1901 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1901

 To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Joint Items, 
           Congressional Budget Office for fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
                referred to the Committee on the Budget

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Joint Items, 
           Congressional Budget Office for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR JOINT ITEMS, 
              CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Joint Items, 
Congressional Budget Office for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 
$50,737,000.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

Materialise NV 

Leuven, Belgium 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-197236 and No. 333-212445) and Form F-3 (No. 333-213649) of Materialise NV of ourreport dated April 30, 2018, relating to the consolidated financial statements which appears in this Annual Report on Form 20-F.

BDO Bedrijfsrevisoren Burg. CVBA 

On behalf of it, 

Bert Kegels 

/s/ Bert Kegels 

Zaventem, Belgium 

April 30, 2018
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 1677** 

TIJON COX , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Social Security Administration , Defendant

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore
. Catherine C. Blake , District Judge. ( 1:10

- cv - 00581

- CCB )

Submitted : November 18, 2010 Decided: November 24, 2010

Before SHEDD and AGEE , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. TiJon Cox, Appellant Pro Se. Alex Gordon, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee
. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: TiJon Cox appeals the distric t court ’ s order denying relief on his complaint alleging violations of his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 , 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (2006)
. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reason s stated by the district court. Cox v. Astrue , No. 1:10

- cv - 00581

- CCB (D. Md. June 7, 2010)
. We further deny Cox’s motions for default judgment and for summary disposition. We deny Cox’s motions to expedite as moot. We dispense with oral argument becaus e the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Gomez, Appellant.

[967 NYS2d 862]

— An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Patricia Nunez, J.), rendered on or about June 23, 2011, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed. Counsel for appellant is referred to Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department (22 NYCRR) § 606.5. Concur — Acosta, J.P., Saxe, Moskowitz, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

TONY R. DALTON, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 14-587-WS-C

ROBERT EARL HERRIN, et al., :

Defendants. :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed 

relevant to the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the 

Report and Recommendation to which objection is made, the Report and 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is 

ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. It is ORDERED that this action be and 

is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

DONE this 19th day of March, 2015.

s/WILLIAM H. STEELE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00587-WS-C Document 7 Filed 03/19/15 Page 1 of 1