alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-4007

___________ Michael McCaslin, by his guardian * ad litem, Bonnie McCaslin, * * Appellant, * * Bonnie McCaslin, guardian ad litem, * * Interested Party, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the County of York, * District of Nebraska * Defendant, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Dale Radcliff, Deputy Sheriff of York * County, in his official and individual * capacity, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: February 6, 1998 Filed: February 25, 1998

___________ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District 1 of Nebraska. -2- Michael McCaslin appeals from a final order of the United States District Court 1 forthe District of Nebraska dismissing his complaint with prejudice for failure t o prosecute under

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). We have carefully reviewed the entire record, and we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying McCaslin his third appointed counsel or in dismissing the acti on for failure to prosecute. See Swope v. Cameron , 73 F.3d 850, 851-52 (8th Cir. 1996) (standard of review for denial o f appointment of

counsel); Sterling v. United States , 985 F.2d 411, 412 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam) (standard of review for Rule 41(b) dismissal). Accordingly, we affirm. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
0802-0910920-1 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm  The Board of Directors  U.S. Bank National Association We have examined management's****assertion, included in the accompanying  Report on Assessment of Compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that U.S. Bank National Association (the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the SEC's Regulation AB for the Corporate Trust Asset Backed Securities****platform (the Platform) as of and for the yearended December 31, 2007,  except for****servicing criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(4)(i), 1122(d)(4)(ii), and 1122(d)(4)(iv)(xiv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by them with respect to the servicing  platform covered by this report. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Platform,  and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.  Our procedures  were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts  calculated or  reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.********In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007, for the Corporate Trust Asset Backed Securities platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.****/s/ Ernst & Young LLP Minneapolis, Minnesota February 12, 2008
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 903 

To provide for the correction of a certain John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 

Resources System map. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2005 

Mrs. HUTCHISON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL

To provide for the correction of a certain John H. Chafee 

Coastal Barrier Resources System map.

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

3 SECTION 1. CORRECTIONS TO JOHN H. CHAFEE COASTAL 

4 BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM MAP. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the 

6 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior 

7 shall make any corrections to the map described in sub8 section (b) that are necessary to ensure that the map is 

9 consistent with the map entitled ‘‘Corrections to Coastal 

10 Barrier Resources System Map Unit T–10’’, dated June 
2

•S 903 IS

1 lllll, 2004, and on file with the Secretary and the 

2 Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Sen3 ate. 

4 (b) MAP DESCRIBED.—The map described in this 

5 subsection is the map that is subtitled ‘‘Four Mile Hill 

6 Unit TX–16P, North Padre Island Unit T10/T10P’’, 

7 which is included in the set of maps entitled ‘‘Coastal Bar8 rier Resources System’’ and dated October 24, 1990. 

9 (c) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary of the Interior 

10 shall keep the map described in subsection (b) on file and 

11 available for public inspection in accordance with section 

12 4(b) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 

13 3503(b)).

Æ
#### Division Seven, Inc., Respondent, et al., Plaintiffs, v HP Builders Corp. et al., Appellants.

[872 NYS2d 496]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants HE Builders Corp., Francis Lewis Realty, LLC, Clinco Realty Corp., and General Accident Insurance Company appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leviss, J.H.O.), dated November 20, 2007, as, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the counterclaim asserted by the defendant HE Builders Corp. against the plaintiff Division Seven, Inc.

Ordered that the appeal by the defendants Francis Lewis Realty, LLC, Clinco Realty Corp., and General Accident Insurance Company is dismissed, as those defendants are not aggrieved by the judgment appealed from *(see*CFLR 5511); and it is further,

*797Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from by the defendant HP Builders Corp.; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent.

At the nonjury trial, in support of its counterclaim against the plaintiff Division Seven, Inc. (hereinafter DSI), the defendant HP Builders Corp. (hereinafter HP), attempted to introduce into evidence invoices purportedly establishing damages it sustained as a result of DSI’s alleged breach of contract. DSI objected, and the Supreme Court sustained the objection. On appeal, HP contends that the Supreme Court erred in precluding the invoices. In light of the lack of any evidence in the record to indicate that DSI was contractually bound to perform the work which was the subject of HP’s counterclaim, any error the Supreme Court may have committed in refusing to admit the invoices into evidence was harmless, as there is no indication that the evidence would have had a substantial influence on the result of the trial *(see*CPLR 2002; *Milone v Milone,*266 AD2d 363, 363-364 [1999]; *Walker v State of New York,*111 AD2d 164, 165 [1985]).

The remaining contentions of HP and DSI either are not properly before us, are without merit, or need not be reached in light of our determination. Rivera, J.P, Angiolillo, Dickerson and Chambers, JJ., concur.
Skip to main content An icon that symbolizes the United States Department of Transportation logo. United States Department of Transportation
        Report a Safety Problem

  Toggle navigation
      National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationNational Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationHomepage

    Ratings
                                Recalls
                                Risky Driving
                                Road Safety
                                Vehicle Safety
      
            More Info

                      Briefing Room
          
                        
            Importing a Vehicle
          
                                      
            
            Data
          
                        
            Research
          
                        
            Laws & Regulations
          
                    
                      Vehicle Manufacturers
                      State Governments
                      Enforcement & Justice Amendment to Final Rule: Requirements and Procedures for Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program


Download file: Amendment to Final Rule: Requirements and Procedures for Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program
 NHTSA Information
              
              About NHTSA
          Careers & Internships
          Contact Us
          Recall Information
          Report a Safety ProblemInformation For
              
              Vehicle Manufacturers
          State Governments
          Enforcement & JusticeNHTSA Sites
              
        SaferCar App
          TrafficSafetyMarketing.gov
          EMS.gov
          911.gov
            Website Information
              
        Web Policies & Notices
          Accessibility
          FOIA
          Privacy Policy
          Information Quality
          Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
          No Fear Act Data
          Ethics
          Civil Rights
          Office of Inspector General
          OIG Hotline
          BusinessUSA
          USA.gov
          WhiteHouse.gov

            National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
              1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
                Washington, D.C. 20590
              888-327-4236888-275-9171 (TTY)
              Twitter
                LinkedIn
                Facebook
                Youtube
                Instagram
        Submit Feedback >
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

         In connection with the Annual Report of Allied Healthcare International
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending September 30, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Timothy M. Aitken, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18. U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

         (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company as at and for the year ended September 30, 2003.

Date:  December 29, 2003


                                      /s/ Timothy M. Aitken
                                     -----------------------------------------
                                     Timothy M. Aitken
                                     Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
                                     Officer of the Company
1009.008
##### 



Exhibit 15 December 1, 2004 Sears, Roebuck and Co.
3333 Beverly Road
Hoffman Estates, IL 60179 We have made a review, in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financial
information of Sears, Roebuck and Co. for the thirteen  week and thirty-nine
week periods ended October 2, 2004 and September 27, 2003, as indicated in our
report dated November 8, 2004, December 1,
2004 as to Note 10 (which report includes an explanatory paragraph
relating to the restatement discussed in Note 10); because we did not perform an audit, we
expressed no opinion on that information. We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended October 2, 2004, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 2-64879, 2-80037,
33-18081, 33-23793, 33-41485, 33-43459, 33-45479, 33-55825, 33-58851, 33-64345,
333-08141, and 333-113532 of Sears, Roebuck and Co.; Registration Statement No.
333-92082 of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Sears, Roebuck Acceptance Corp.;
Registration Statement Nos. 33-64775, 333-18591, 333-43309, and 333-120219 of
Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Sears, Roebuck and Co. Deferred Compensation Plan;
Registration Statement No. 333-102114 of Sears, Roebuck and Co., the Sears
401(K) Savings Plan (formerly, the Savings and Profit Sharing Fund of Sears
Employees and the Sears 401(K) Profit Sharing Plan) and Lands End, Inc.
Retirement Plan; Registration Statement No. 33-44671 of Sears, Roebuck and Co.
and Sears DC Corp.; Registration Statement No. 333-38131 of Sears, Roebuck and
Co. and the Sears Associate Stock Ownership Plan; Registration Statement No.
333-52056 of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and the 2000 Employee Stock Plan;
Registration Statement No. 333-72514 of Sears, Roebuck and Co. and the 2001
Broad-Based Stock Option Plan; and Registration Statement No. 333-87942 of
Sears, Roebuck and Co. and the 2002 Non-Employee Director Stock Plan. We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act. /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Exhibit 12.2



I, David Corcoran, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of

International Barrier Technology Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of

a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the

statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements

were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this

Annual Report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial

information included in this report, fairly present in all material

respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of

the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

<r>

4. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for

establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures

as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the company

and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such

disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,

to ensure that material information relating to the company, including

its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within

those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is

being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and

procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the

effectiveness of the disclosure controls and 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 companys internal control

over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the

annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to

materially affect, the companys internal control over financial

reporting; and

</r>

5. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on

our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to

the companys auditors and the audit committee of the companys board of

directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or

operation of internal control over financial reporting which are

reasonably likely to adversely affect the company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 have a significant role in the companys internal control

over financial reporting.





Date: March 17, 2005



David Corcoran_________

Chief Financial Officer
#### Richard J. HARDENBROOK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EMPLOYEES OF the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF the INTERIOR; et al., Defendants-Appel-lees.

No. 08-15149.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 12, 2009.*

Filed May 26, 2009.

Richard J. Hardenbrook, Carson City, NV, pro se.

*621Gregory William Addington, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, Nhu Q. Nguyen, Esquire, Senior Deputy Attorney General, George Taylor, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Colleen E. Hemingway, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Nevada Attorney General, Carson City, NV, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: PREGERSON, CANBY, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. *621R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Richard J. Hardenbrook appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). *Knievel v. ESPN,*393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Hardenbrook’s third amended complaint because it failed to state a cognizable legal theory upon which relief can be granted. *See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t,*901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir.1988) (“Dismissal can be based on the lack of a cognizable legal theory[.]”).

Hardenbrook’s remaining contentions are without merit.

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### State v. Massey

Case below: 174 N.C. App. 216

No. 637A05

1. AG’s NOA (Dissent) (COA04-1443)

2. AG’s Motion for Temporary Stay

3. AG’s Petition for Writ of Supersedeas

4. AG’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

1. _

2. Allowed 360 N.C. 179

3. Allowed 12/19/06

4. Allowed 12/19/06
#### Dawson *v.*Briscoe *et al.*

1. It is *no*ground for dismissing a motion for a new trial, that the brief of evidence contains some superfluous matter; and an error of the court in approving the brief over objection is cured by the previous written assent of the objecting counsel to the correctness *724of the brief. The proper motion would have been to purge the brief of all its superfluities, pointing out the same specifically.

2. On the merits, the case is within the rule that the first grant of a new trial will not be interfered with.

July 16, 1894.

Motion for a new trial. Before Judge Bichar H. Clark. DeKalb superior court. August term, 1898.

W. J. Albert and T. C. Battle, for plaintiff.

Lewis & Green, for defendants.

*Judgment affirmed.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       8,087,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,447,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 77,455,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            87,989,000
<PP&E>                                       1,674,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 807,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              98,766,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       39,761,000
<BONDS>                                     21,845,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       146,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  37,014,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                98,766,000
<SALES>                                    260,834,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           260,834,000
<CGS>                                      222,488,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              222,488,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            26,409,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,685,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              9,252,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,793,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,459,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,459,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.94
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.94


</TABLE>
##### 



MISSION RESOURCES CORPORATION Exhibit 32.1 Certification of
Chief Executive Officer
of Mission Resources Corporation This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-Q (the Form 10-Q) for the quarter ended
March 31, 2005 of Mission Resources Corporations (the Issuer). I, Robert L. Cavnar, the Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify that:  (i)
    the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.  Dated: May 10, 2005
    
    
    
    /s/ Robert L. Cavnar
 Subscribed and sworn to before meThis 10th day of May 2005 /s/ Carmen M. Garcia Notary Public in and for the
State of Texas My commission expires: May 15, 2006 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Mission
Resources Corporation and will be retained by Mission Resources Corporation and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 38
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-17-00148-CR

Gary Deon Elbeyallen a/k/a Gary 

Deon Allen

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 297th District Court

of Tarrant County (1451483D)

May 3, 2018

Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Bonnie Sudderth

 Chief Justice Bonnie Sudderth