alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HUNG M. NGUYEN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

YOLO COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

OFFICE, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 21-15698 

D.C. No. 2:21-cv-00239-TLN-KJN 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 19, 2022**

Before: SILVERMAN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. 

Hung M. Nguyen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment 

dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims arising out of his 

prosecution for trespassing. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We 

review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JAN 27 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 21-15698 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We may 

affirm on any basis supported by the record. Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 

1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm. 

The district court properly dismissed Nguyen’s claims under 42 U.S.C. 

§§ 1983 and 1985, and state law, because defendant is entitled to prosecutorial 

immunity. See Cousins v. Lockyer, 568 F.3d 1063, 1068 (9th Cir. 2009) (setting 

forth the scope of prosecutorial immunity as to § 1983 claims); Sykes v. California, 

497 F.2d 197, 200 (9th Cir. 1974) (applying prosecutorial immunity to § 1985 

claim); Sullivan v. County of Los Angeles, 527 P.2d 865, 870-71 (Cal. 1974) 

(setting forth the scope of prosecutorial immunity under California Government 

Code § 821.6 as to state law claims).

Dismissal of Nguyen’s claim for violation of Title II of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (“ADA”) was proper because Nguyen failed to allege facts 

sufficient to show that defendant intentionally discriminated against him because 

of his disability. See Duvall v. County of Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1124, 1135, 1138-40 

(9th Cir. 2001) (discussing elements of a Title II claim under the ADA, and the 

required showing of intentional discrimination to state a Title II claim for 

damages).

We reject as without merit Nguyen’s contentions that the district court was 

biased and prejudiced against him. 
3 21-15698 

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Nguyen’s motion for judicial notice is denied as unnecessary. 

AFFIRMED.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document









































 
 

  Exhibit 10.20    
    


 EnerNOC, Inc.  


Summary
of 2009 Executive Officer Bonus Plan 


        The
Company's executive officers have the following bonus targets (expressed as a percentage of salary unless otherwise stated): 



					
	Name and Position



 
	 	Target Bonus (%) 	 
	Timothy G. Healy
 Chief Executive Officer and Chairman	 	 	100	%
	
David B. Brewster
 President	
 	
 	
75	
%
	
David M. Samuels
 Executive Vice President	
 	
 	
70	
%
	
Gregg M. Dixon
 Senior Vice President of Sales and Business Development	
 	
 	
115	
%
	
Neal C. Isaacson
 Chief Financial Officer	
 	
 	
50	
%
	
Darren P. Brady
 Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer	
 	
 	
50	
%






        Each
executive officer's 2009 bonus amount (the "Bonus Amount") will be determined based upon the achievement of certain pre-determined individual and corporate performance
objectives. Specifically, each executive officer's Bonus Amount will be weighted as follows: 80% will be based on the Company's achievement of certain revenue, gross profit, net income (loss) and cash
flow targets applicable to 2009, which targets have been set by the Board, and 20% will be discretionary based on the achievement of individual or departmental performance goals (the "Discretionary
Bonus Amount") The Discretionary Bonus Amount will be recommended by the Company's chief executive officer, except in the case of the Company's chief executive officer, whose Discretionary Bonus
Amount will be based on the recommendation of the compensation committee of the board of directors. The bonuses will be paid within 90 days of the determination of the Bonus Amounts. Actual
Bonus Amounts may be higher or lower than the executive's bonus target. 











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.20
EX-10.W.1







Exhibit 10(w.1)




AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




     This Amendment No. 2 to Employment Agreement (“Amendment”) made as of April 10, 2008 between
DUSA Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a New Jersey corporation (“DUSA”) having principal offices at 25 Upton
Drive, Wilmington, Massachusetts 01887, and Richard C. Christopher (“Christopher”), who resides at
31 Chester Street, Andover, Massachusetts 01810.




WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Employment Agreement dated January 1, 2004 which was
amended as of October 24, 2006 (the “Agreement”); and




WHEREAS, the parties now wish to further amend the Agreement in writing to reflect an
increase in the cash bonus opportunity percentage;




NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises, the parties agree as
follows:


1. Paragraph 3 of the Agreement (Remuneration), which reads in relevant part:




Following the end of each fiscal year, the Board may award a cash bonus to Christopher in an
amount up to 30% of Christopher’s current base salary for such year as determined by the Board in
its sole discretion.



     Shall be amended to reflect an increase in the cash bonus opportunity percentage to read:




Following the end of each fiscal year, the Board may award a cash bonus to Christopher in an
amount up to 40% of Christopher’s current base salary for such year as determined by the Board in
its sole discretion.


2. Except as expressly provided in this Amendment No. 2, the Agreement shall remain unmodified and
in full force and effect and is hereby ratified and confirmed. The execution, delivery, and
effectiveness of the Amendment No. 2 shall not, except as expressly provided herein, operate as a
waiver of any right, power, or remedy of Christopher or DUSA.




     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Amendment No. 2 to Employment
Agreement as of the latest date and year stated below.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	ATTEST:	 	 	 	DUSA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Susan Tennent
 


	 	 
	 	By:
	 	/s/ Robert F. Doman
 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Robert F. Doman	 	 
	 	 	 	 	President and Chief Executive Officer	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Dated:
	 	5-12-08	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	WITNESS:	 	 	 	EMPLOYEE:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Susan Tennent	 	 	 	/s/ Richard C. Christopher	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Richard C. Christopher	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Dated:
	 	5-12-08
Exhibit 10.18

BASE SALARY AND TARGET BONUS
FOR THE NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

The following table sets forth the current annual base salaries and target bonuses of the Chief Executive Officer and the other named executive officers of Zale
Corporation (the "Company").

Name

Base Salary

Target Bonus %Mary E. Burton
President and Chief Executive Officer

$
925,000

125Rodney Carter
Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer

$
435,000

60Charles Fieramosca
Corporate Senior Vice President and President, Bailey Banks & Biddle

$
359,750

45Gilbert P. Hollander
Executive Vice President and Chief Sourcing and Supply Chain Officer

$
400,000

60


For
additional information regarding the compensation of the Company's executive officers, please refer to the information under the headings "Executive Compensation" in the Company's
definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

---



QuickLinks
/Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C.
Statement of registered  closed-end investment company with respect to purchases
of its own securities pursuant to Rule N-23(c)-1 during the last calendar month.

Report for the calendar month ending March 31, 1998

MFS Government Markets Income Trust
Date        Identification   Shares      Repurchase   NAV         Broker
            of Security      Repurchased Price
3/9/98      Shares of        85,000      6.75         7.44        Merrill Lynch
            Beneficial
            Interest
3/10/98     Shares of        4,400       6.75         7.44        Merrill Lynch
            Beneficial
            Interest
3/16/98     Shares of        180,000     6.8125       7.45        Merrill Lynch
            Beneficial
            Interest
3/23/98     Shares of        19,700      6.8125       7.45        Merrill Lynch
            Beneficial
            Interest






Total Shares Repurchased:  289,100
Remarks: None.

MFS Government Markets Income Trust
by:  W. Thomas London
         W. Thomas London
         Treasurer
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350 In connection with
the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Le@P Technology, Inc. (the
Company) for the twelve month period ended December 31, 2006 (the Annual
Report), I, Donald J. Ciappenelli, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge and belief that the
Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: March 28, 2007
/s/ Donald J. CiappenelliDonald J. CiappenelliChief Executive Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00134-CV

IN RE WESLEY P. SCHNELL RELATOR

------------

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

TRIAL COURT NO. A2628651

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

------------

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of 

the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MEIER, GARDNER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DELIVERED: April 30, 2015

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8(d).
EX-10.16.2








    Exhibit 10.16.2



 




    January 5,
    2008
    



 



    CCI-B Langfield I, LLC




    c/o Capital
    Commercial Investments, Inc




    1900 W. Loop South, Suite 770




    Houston, Texas 77027




    Attention: Tyndall Yaap



 



    Re:  Commercial Lease Agreement (Unimproved Property),
    dated March 3, 2008, by and between CCI-B Langfield I,
    LLC, as Lessor, and L. B. Foster Company, as Lessee (as amended,
    the “Lease”), for certain property located in Harris
    County, Texas as more particularly described therein; NOTICE OF
    PARTIAL TERMINATION



 



    The undersigned, as Lessee, hereby notifies you that it has
    elected, pursuant to the First Amendment to Commercial Lease
    Agreement dated as of April 1, 2008 (the “First
    Amendment”), to partially terminate the Temporary Premises
    as set forth in this letter. By countersigning this letter in
    the space provided below, you are acknowledging your agreement
    to the terms set forth herein, which shall be and constitute an
    amendment to the Lease. All capitalized terms used but not
    defined herein shall have the meaning given to such terms in the
    Lease.



 



    The Lease with respect to that portion of the Temporary Premises
    containing approximately 3.7 acres and described on
    Exhibit A hereto (the “Partial Termination
    Parcel”) is hereby terminated, such termination to be
    effective as of January 31, 2009.



 



    From and after the date immediately set forth above and
    continuing until the expiration of the Temporary Premises Term,
    the surface area of the Temporary Premises shall be comprised of
    a total of 5.3146 acres of land.



 



    The Lease, as amended by this letter, is hereby ratified and
    affirmed and, except as expressly amended hereby, all other
    items and provisions of the Lease remain unchanged and continue
    to be in full force and effect. The terms of this letter shall
    control over any conflicts between the terms of the Lease and
    the terms of this letter.



 



    This letter may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of
    which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which
    together shall constitute one document. The parties hereto agree
    that execution of this letter with delivery accomplished by
    facsimile copy transmission shall constitute and have the same
    effect as the delivery of an executed original.



 



    Sincerely,




 



    L. B. Foster Company




 



    Steven L. Hart



 



    Acknowledged and agreed as of this 6th day of January, 2009.



 



    CCI-B Langfield I, LLC



 


			
	    By 
	
    /s/  Tyndall
    Yaap

	 







    Name:     Tyndall Yaap, CCIM, SIOR
EXHIBIT 10.23

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                             COVEST BANCSHARES, INC.
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


	THIS "AMENDMENT" is made effective as of May 30, 2002, by and between
CoVest Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company"), COVEST BANC, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (the
"Bank") and PAUL A. LARSEN ("Executive").

                               W I T N E S S E T H
	WHEREAS, Company, Bank and Executive have previously entered in that
certain Employment Agreement effective as of April 27, 1999 (the
"Agreement"); and
	WHEREAS, Company, Bank and Executive wish to amend the Agreement to
extend certain benefits to the Executive; and
	WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company has authorized amendment
and renewal of the Agreement.
	NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual covenants
herein contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which consideration is mutually acknowledged by the
parties, it is hereby agreed as follows:
1. The Period of Employment is extended for twelve (12)
additional months as of April 27, 2002.
2. Section 3(e) is amended by adding the following to the end
of such section:

	"Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of the termination of the
Executive's employment with the Company and the Bank under circumstances
constituting an Event of Termination (as defined in Paragraph 4(b) below),
the Company, or its successor, shall: (i) continue Executive's health
insurance coverage comparable to his coverage as of the date of termination
of Executive's until Executive attains age sixty-five (65); (ii) shall not
require Executive to pay any greater amount of the premium for such coverage
as Executive shall be paying as of the date of his termination of employment;
and (iii) shall permit Executive to add dependents to such coverage at the
same cost, if any, paid by similarly situated senior executives for dependent
coverage.

	IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be duly
executed at Des Plaines, Illinois on the date above set forth.

COVEST BANCSHARES, INC.


By:
Its President and Chief Executive Officer


COVEST BANC, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION


By:
Its President and Chief Executive Officer


PAUL A. LARSEN



Address:
#### CYCLOTHERM CORPORATION v. MILLER.

Civil No. 8544.

United States District Court W. D. Pennsylvania.

Nov. 13, 1950.

Isadore M. Goldsmith, H. A. Robinson, and Dickie, Robinson & McCamey all of Pittsburgh, Pa., for plaintiff.

James J. Burns, Pittsburgh, Pa., for defendant.

MARSH, District Judge.

The plaintiff’s complaint sets forth the jurisdictional requirements of this court and alleges that “defendant owes, the plaintiff the sum of $11,448.06, with interest from November 3, 1949, for goods sold' and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant between August 16, 1948 and November 3, 1949.” The defendant’s answer denies the debt and asserts a counterclaim in the amount of $60,000.00. The case is before the court on plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss the Defendant’s Counterclaim because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can 'be granted.

The facts alleged in the counterclaim are in substance that the Cyclotherm Corporation sold a steam generator through the defendant and another to Pittsburgh Terminal Warehouse, Inc., a corporation located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; that after the installation of the boiler and while the cycle of operation was being set, an explosion occurred and as a result, one of the employees of Pittsburgh Terminal Warehouse was killed. The widow of the deceased employee brought an action in trespass against Cyclotherm Corporation and William Gripp Miller in the Allegheny County Court of *89Common Pleas at No. 660 July Term, 1949. The Common Pleas Court dismissed the action as to Cyclotherm because of lack of jurisdiction. The action against Miller is still pending. The defendant asserts as his counterclaim here, his contingent liability in the state court action.

 The counterclaim asserted by the defendant is dependent -upon his failure to prevail in the suit in the state court. It is not the purpose of Rule 13 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., to permit as a- counterclaim allegations which might eventually ripen into a claim. The counterclaim asserted by the defendant has not matured. See Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Marbon Corporation, D.C., D.Del. 1940, 32 F.Supp. 279, and Bach v. Quigan, D.C., E.D.N.Y.1945, 5 F.R.D. 34.

The counterclaim will be dismissed, with leave to defendant to file an amended answer within ten days from the date hereof.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

       
<S>                                        <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996             SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             114                       0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   114                       0
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     181                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,927                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        10,600                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (14,346)                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       181                       0
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   988                  10,577
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (988)                (10,577)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

 

</TABLE>
Form of Waivers of Senior Employees to Lender



 Exhibit 10(q) 
 FORM OF WAIVER OF SENIOR EMPLOYEES TO LENDER 
 In consideration for the benefits I will receive as a
result of the participation of General Motors Corporation (together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, the “Company”) in the United States Department of the Treasury’s Program for Systemically Significant Failing
Institutions (as set forth in Notice 2008-PSSFI) and any other economic stabilization program implemented by the Department of the Treasury under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the “EESA”) either prior to
or subsequent to the date of this letter from me (any such program, including the Program for Systemically Significant Failing Institutions, an “EESA Program”), I hereby voluntarily waive any claim against the United States
or my employer for any failure to pay or accrue any bonus or incentive compensation as a result of compliance with the regulations issued by the Department of the Treasury in connection with an EESA Program, including without limitation the
guidelines set forth in Notice 2008-PSSFI and the requirements of the Loan and Security Agreement dated as of December 31, 2008 between the Company and the United States Department of the Treasury (the “Limitations”).

 I acknowledge that the aforementioned regulations and Limitations may require modification of the compensation, bonus, incentive and other
benefit plans, arrangements, policies and agreements (including so-called “golden parachute” agreements), whether or not in writing, that I may have with the Company or in which I may participate as they relate to the period the United
States holds any equity or debt securities of the Company acquired through an EESA Program, including without limitation the Program for Systemically Significant Failing Institutions, or for any other period applicable under such EESA Program or
Limitations, as the case may be. 
 This waiver includes all claims I may have under the laws of the United States or any state related to
the requirements imposed by the aforementioned regulations and Limitations, including without limitation a claim for any compensation or other payments or benefits I would otherwise receive, any challenge to the process by which the aforementioned
regulations or Limitations are or were adopted and any tort or constitutional claim about the effect of these regulations or Limitations on my employment relationship. 
 Intending to be legally bound, I have executed this Waiver 
 as of this 31st day of December, 2008.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1085 

CA 13-01767 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

BRIAN GOLEBIESKI, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, 

V ORDER

CITY OF BUFFALO, DEFENDANT. 

--------------------------------------- 

ESTATE OF DAVID G. JAY, ESQ., DECEASED, 

RESPONDENT. 

 

HOGAN WILLIG, PLLC, AMHERST (DIANE R. TIVERON OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT. 

ARTHUR J. RUMIZEN, WILLIAMSVILLE, FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Kevin M.

Dillon, J.), entered December 3, 2012. The order, among other things,

determined that the Estate of David G. Jay, Esq. is entitled to

one-third of the counsel fees received by the law firm of HoganWillig

and/or Steven M. Cohen, Esq., in this action. 

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed

without costs (see CPLR 5511; Field v New York City Tr. Auth., 4 AD3d

389).

Entered: January 2, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court