alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Carl Gene THYMES, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, Local 1167 Defendant—Appellee.

No. 05-55529.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 12, 2006.*

Decided June 20, 2006.

Apt. C, San Bernardino, CA, for Plaintiff — Appellant.

Jeffrey S. Wohlner, Esq., Wohlner Kaplon Phillips Young *&*Cutler, Sherman Oaks, CA, for Defendant — Appellee.

Before: WALLACE, KLEINFELD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM ***

Carl Gene Thymes appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for the United Food and Commercial Worker’s International Union, Local 1167, (“Union”) in Thymes’ action alleging that his Union breached its duty of fair representation when it did not arbitrate his grievance against his employer. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Jesinger v. Nevada Fed. Credit Union,*24 F.3d 1127, 1130 (9th Cir. 1994), and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that Thymes failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the Union breached its duty of fair representation in choosing to not pursue Thymes’s grievance in arbitration. *See Stevens v. Moore Business Forms, Inc.,*18 F.3d 1443, 1447 (9th Cir.1994). The evidence shows that the Union investigated Thymes’s allegations, and found that his claims of discrimination could not be substantiated by documents that Thymes offered as evidence. Moreover, the Union requested that Thymes provide further plausible, specific, information to substantiate his claims of discrimination, and Thymes failed to do so. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that the Union acted “in an arbitrary, discriminatory, or bad faith” manner towards Thymes. *See id.; Air Line Pilots Ass’n Int’l v. O’Neill,*499 U.S. 65, 66, 111 S.Ct. 1127, 113 L.Ed.2d 51 (1991) (unions are to be afforded a wide latitude in determining how to handle grievances and in deciding *751what grievances are to proceed to arbitration).

Thymes’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
937.512
# NIMH Pages About Brain Anatomy and Physiology

----

### Latest Science News About Brain Anatomy and Physiology

Study Reveals Potential Neural Marker for Social Impairment in Psychotic Disorders
March 25, 2024

Scientists Unveil Complete Cell Map of a Whole Mammalian Brain
December 13, 2023

Scientists Unveil Detailed Cell Maps of the Human Brain and the Nonhuman Primate Brain 
October 12, 2023

----

### Latest Video and Audio About Brain Anatomy and Physiology

Director’s Innovation Speaker Series: Addressing Social Determinants to Optimize Infant Brain Development

The NIMH Director’s Innovation Speaker Series: Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience in the Era of Big Data

The NIMH Director’s Innovation Speaker Series: Advancing Therapies for Central Nervous System Disorders

----

### Latest Director's Messages About Brain Anatomy and Physiology

Brain Science for Everyone — Including You 
                                                          By Joshua Gordon on                March 13, 2023

Looking Back, Moving Forward
                                                          By Joshua Gordon on                January 30, 2023

Exploring the Role of Somatic Mosaicism in Human Biology
                                                          By Joshua Gordon on                November 22, 2022
#### In the Matter of Michael S. Volpe, Petitioner, v Kevin F. Murray, as Deputy State Comptroller, Respondent.

[976 NYS2d 612]

Spain, J.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Comptroller which denied petitioner’s applications for performance of duty and accidental disability retirement benefits.

In August 2009, petitioner, a police sergeant, applied for accidental and performance of duty disability retirement benefits, claiming that he is permanently disabled as a result of injuries to his head, neck and right shoulder stemming from two incidents. Specifically, on June 20, 1990, while chasing a suspect, petitioner reportedly tripped over a curb and sustained a laceration to his head, a twisted ankle and pain in his neck and shoulder. Petitioner lost no time from work as a result of this incident. Petitioner also alleged that, on June 5, 2006, while assigned to front desk duty, he sustained injuries to his neck, shoulder and arm when he allegedly tried to catch a falling computer monitor. Following the initial denial of his applications, petitioner requested a hearing and redetermination. Although the New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System conceded that petitioner is permanently incapacitated from the performance of his duties, it did not concede causation. The Hearing Officer found, among other things, that petitioner did not establish that he was incapacitated as a result of an accident or a disability sustained in service. The Comptroller adopted the Hearing Officer’s findings and denied the applications, prompting the commencement of this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. Petitioner “is entitled to accidental or performance of duty disability retirement benefits only upon demonstrating that he was incapacitated from the performance of duty as the natural and proximate result of an accident or disability *1055sustained, in service” *(Matter of Ferris v DiNapoli,*92 AD3d 1079, 1080 [2012] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; *see Matter of Cantelmo v New York State Comptroller,*105 AD3d 1306, 1307 [2013]). Here, the Hearing Officer specifically credited the opinion of orthopedic surgeon Jeffrey Meyer that petitioner’s disability was related to a non-work related motor vehicle accident, in which petitioner sustained neck and back injuries that required lumbar surgery and an 11-month recovery period. Inasmuch as there is substantial evidence supporting the Comptroller’s determination, it will not be disturbed despite the presence of other medical evidence in the record that might support a contrary conclusion *(see Matter of Ortiz v DiNapoli,*98 AD3d 1224, 1225 [2012]).

Given this conclusion, petitioner’s remaining arguments challenging the Comptroller’s determination that the June 1990 and June 2006 incidents did not constitute accidents have been rendered academic *(see Matter of Ferris v DiNapoli,*92 AD3d at 1080).

Peters, EJ., Lahtinen and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
#### In the Matter of Jessie J. Barnes, Appellant, v Ronald Harling, Superintendent, Monroe County Jail, Respondent.

Submitted July 9, 2012;

decided September 11, 2012

On the Court’s own motion, appeal dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved. Motion for leave to appeal denied.
EXHIBIT 21.0**Subsidiaries of Registrant****•** 2 Quaker Road, Inc., a New York Corporation **•** 2 Quaker Road, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company **•** 265 Livingston Street Corp., a New Jersey Corporation **•** Barr Distribution Company, a Delaware Corporation **•** Barr Laboratories, Inc., a Delaware Corporation **•** Barr Ventures, LLC. a Delaware Limited Liability Company **•** BMI, Inc., a Delaware Corporation **•** BRL, Inc., a Delaware Corporation **•** Duramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware Corporation **•** Duramed Pharmaceutical Sales Corp., a Delaware Corporation **•** Duramed Research, Inc., a Delaware Corporation **•** Women’s Capital Corp., a Delaware Corporation
EX-1
1 Former Rule 11(e)(1)(C) is now Rule 11(c)(1)(C). See Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 advisory committee note.

2 The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 08-2512

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. Sidney L. Shelton, also known as * Andre Henderson, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: March 9, 2009 Filed: May 1, 2009

___________ Before MURPHY, MELLOY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. In 1998, Sidney L. Shelton pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to distribute cocaine base. Pursuant to Fede ral Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(e)(1)(C) (1998), 1 Shelton agreed to a 300-month sentence. The district court 2accepted Shelton’s plea agreement and sentenced him to 300 months’ imprisonment.-2- In 2008, after the U.S. Sentencing Commission approved the crack cocaine amendments to the U.S. Sent encing Guidelines, Shelton moved for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The district court denied Shelton’s motion because it found that Shelton’s Ru le 11(e)(1)(C) plea agreement made him ineligible for such a reduction.
Shelton appeals the district court’s ru ling and argues that, as a matter of law, his Rule 11(e)(1)(C) plea agreement does not make him ineligible for a § 3582(c)(2) sentence reduction pursuant to the crack cocaine amendments . Our decision in United States v. Scurlark , 560 F.3d 839 (8th Cir 2009), forecloses Shelton’s argument. In Scurlark , we rejected a materially indistinguishable argument and held that courts may not, based on subsequent Guidelines amendments, reduce sentences under § 3582(c)(2) for defendants who have pleaded guilty pursuan t to Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreements. Id. at 841–43. For the reasons set forth in Scurlark , we therefore affirm the district court.

______________________________
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**SECTION 1350CERTIFICATION**

 

I, C. Kenneth Love, thePrincipal Executive Officer of Kimball Hill, Inc. (the “Company”),pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that based on my knowledgethe Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31,2007, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission: (i) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and (ii) the information contained insuch Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ C. KENNETH LOVE                                |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
|   | C. Kenneth Love                                    |
|   | *President,  Chief Executive Officer and Director* |

 

Date: February 14,2008

 

 

 

----
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 247 

Recognizing the 50th anniversary of The Dental College of Georgia at 

Augusta University. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 21, 2019 

Mr. ALLEN (for himself, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, and Mr. FERGUSON) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

Education and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 50th anniversary of The Dental College of 

Georgia at Augusta University. 

Whereas The Dental College of Georgia (DCG) welcomed its 

first class of students in 1969 as a result of the efforts 

of many individuals, led by Dr. Judson C. Hickey, Dr. 

Louis Boucher, and Dr. Thomas Zwemer; 

Whereas the goal of the DCG is to prepare students to provide compassionate, innovative oral health care for the 

citizens of the State of Georgia and beyond by emphasizing education, patient care, research, and service; 

Whereas 50 years after the DCG welcomed its first class of 

students, the goal of the DCG remains the same; 

Whereas the State of Georgia, including the General Assembly of the State of Georgia, and many benefactors generVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:07 Mar 21, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR247.IH HR247

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 247 IH 

ously provided funding for a new state-of-the-art facility 

for the DCG, which opened in 2011; 

Whereas the DCG is the sole dental college in the State of 

Georgia, enrolling nearly 400 students and 60 residents 

annually; 

Whereas, as of March 2019, the DCG has 8 residency programs, including advanced education in general dentistry, 

endodontics, general practice, oral and maxillofacial surgery, orthodontics, pediatric dentistry, periodontics, and 

prosthodontics; 

Whereas the DCG also has a fellowship program in esthetic 

and implant dentistry; 

Whereas all of the programs of the DCG provide advanced 

education in specialized areas of dentistry; and 

Whereas since 2006 the DCG has been responsible for community outreach and has received funding from the 

Health Resources and Services Administration that has 

allowed senior dental students to provide oral health services at more than 25 different clinical sites in underserved areas of the State of Georgia, including in Albany, 

the greater Atlanta area, Augusta, Columbus, Dalton, 

Gainesville, Greensboro, Jonesboro, Rochelle, Savannah, 

and Waynesboro: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the 50th anniversary of The 

3 Dental College of Georgia at Augusta University and 

4 its distinguished alumni; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 247 IH 

1 (2) recognizes the contributions of The Dental 

2 College of Georgia at Augusta University to edu3 cating the dentists of the State of Georgia; and 

4 (3) directs the Clerk of the House of Represent5 atives to make an appropriate copy of this resolution 

6 available for distribution to The Dental College of 

7 Georgia at Augusta University. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
CERTIFICATE OF RESOLUTION

I hereby certify that at a Board of Directors meeting of the Bagdad
Chase Inc held in Blairs Restaurant 718 South Grand Avenue, Los
Angeles, California June 18, 1968 at 2:00 P.M. the following
resolution was unanimously adopted:
RESOLVED that the officers of the corporation be authorized to issue
80,000 shares of Bagdad Chase Inc stock to Crown Oil Company, a Utah
corporation, or its nominee, in return for the appropriate transfer
by said Company of all of its assets and disclosed liabilities and
thereafter to take the necessary steps to issue individual
certificates out of the one certificate for 80,000 shares according
to the list of stockholders who have turned in their Crown Oil
Company stock for liquidation and satisfaction of their proportionate
interest in said Company assets,

WITNESS my hand and seal of the corporation this 18th day of July,
1968.

Assistant Secretary
ex_4-1.htm












Exhibit 4.2







ACCESS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.







Amendment to Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 2005 Equity Incentive Plan







The Board of Directors of Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the "Company"), pursuant to authority reserved in Section 15 of the 2005 Equity Incentive Plan of the Company (the "2005 Plan"), authorized an amendment to the 2005 Plan as follows, which amendment was approved by the stockholders of the Company on May 7, 2013:







Sections 4 of the 2005 Plan are deleted in their entirety and replaced with the following:







4.           StockSubjecttothePlan.  At no time shall the number of shares of Stock issued pursuant to or subject to outstanding Awards granted under the Plan (including pursuant to Incentive Options), nor the number of shares of Stock issued pursuant to Incentive Options, exceed 25,000,0001 shares of Stock; subject, however, to the provisions of Section 8 of the Plan. For purposes of applying the foregoing limitation, (a) if any Option or Stock Appreciation Right expires, terminates, or is cancelled for any reason without having been exercised in full, or if any other Award is forfeited by the recipient, the shares not purchased by the Optionee or which are forfeited by the recipient shall again be available for Awards to be granted under the Plan and (b) if any Option is exercised by delivering previously owned shares in payment of the exercise price therefor, only the net number of shares, that is, the number of shares issued minus the number received by the Company in payment of the exercise price, shall be considered to have been issued pursuant to an Award granted under the Plan. In addition, settlement of any Award shall not count against the foregoing limitations except to the extent settled in the form of Stock. Shares of Stock issued pursuant to the Plan may be either authorized but unissued shares or shares held by the Company in its treasury.












IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has adopted this Amendment, effective as of the 7th day of May, 2013.







ACCESS PHARMACEUTICALS







By:  /s/  Stephen B. Thompson


Stephen B. Thompson


Chief Financial Officer














  

1 Such number equates to amounts approved by stockholders on: May 7, 2013 – 25,000,000 shares of Stock; May 26, 2010 – 5,000,000 shares of Stock; May 21, 2008 – 3,150,000 shares of Stock; on May 17, 2007 – 1,675,000 shares of Stock; and May 19, 2006 - 1,000,000 shares of Stock (originally 5,000,000 shares of Stock adjusted as a result of the one-for-five reverse stock split effected on June 5, 2006).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-3 (Nos. 33-13278, 33-27498, 33-45699, 33-58340, 33-50395, 33-51615,
33-65301, 333-08549, 333-15089, 333-15089-01 through 04 and 333-32909), Form S-4
(Nos. 333-22733, 333-22733-01 and 333-31061), and Form S-8 (Nos. 2-67517,
2-97972, 33-20693, 33-21564, 33-41014, 33-52329, 33-54971, 333-12181, 333-19963,
333-34371, 333-31061 and 333-43959) and in the related Prospectuses of Bankers
Trust New York Corporation of our report dated January 23, 1997, (except for
Note 28, as to which the date is March 6, 1997), with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Bankers Trust New York Corporation and
Subsidiaries at December 31, 1996 and for each of the two years ended December
31, 1996, prior to their restatement for the 1997 pooling-of-interests with
Alex. Brown Incorporated, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1997 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


                                        /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                            ---------------------
                                            Ernst & Young LLP

New York, New York
March 5, 1998


               BANKERS TRUST NEW YORK CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
               ---------------------------------------------------
                                      111
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

LAMAR P. OGELSBY,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 601 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 10th day of June, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.

Justice Wecht did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 290 

Supporting increased awareness of sepsis and the importance of early 

diagnosis and appropriate intervention. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 4, 2019 

Ms. MATSUI (for herself and Mr. GUTHRIE) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting increased awareness of sepsis and the importance 

of early diagnosis and appropriate intervention. 

Whereas sepsis is a medical condition resulting from an immune system response to an infection; 

Whereas this overwhelming response to infection can rapidly 

lead to tissue damage, organ failure, and death; 

Whereas over 1.7 million individuals in the United States develop sepsis each year; 

Whereas over 270,000 individuals in the United States die 

from sepsis each year, more than from prostate cancer, 

breast cancer, and HIV/AIDS combined; 

Whereas the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that one in three patients who die in a hospital 

have sepsis; 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 290 IH 

Whereas according to the Agency for Healthcare Research 

and Quality, sepsis is the most common diagnosis for inpatient hospital stays in the United States; 

Whereas sepsis is the most expensive condition treated in 

hospitals in the United States, consuming over $24 billion each year; 

Whereas sepsis is the number one cause of hospital readmissions, generating over $2 billion in costs annually; 

Whereas over 80 percent of septic patients are septic upon 

admission to the hospital; 

Whereas mortality from septic shock increases by up to 8 

percent for every hour that treatment is delayed; 

Whereas rapid diagnosis and treatment can prevent up to 80 

percent of sepsis fatalities; and 

Whereas the combination of early detection of sepsis and appropriate interventions can significantly improve the 

chances of survival for patients with all types of sepsis: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) is committed to increasing awareness of 

3 sepsis and encouraging the education of patients, 

4 families, health care professionals, and government 

5 agencies on the critical importance of early diagnosis 

6 as the key for patients to survive sepsis; and 

7 (2) supports innovative public-private partner8 ships and the pursuit of innovative financing tools, 

9 incentives, and other mechanisms to accelerate the 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 290 IH 

1 pursuit of improved early detection and appropriate 

2 intervention for patients with sepsis. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS