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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOHN CERVANTES,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

EMERALD CASCADE RESTAURANT

SYSTEMS, INC., DBA Jack-in-the-Box,

Inc.,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 13-15595

D.C. No. 3:11-cv-00242-VPC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Valerie P. Cooke, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 15, 2016** 

San Francisco, California

Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

This is a Title VII employment discrimination appeal in which the

Plaintiff/Appellant, John Cervantes, prevailed after a jury trial, and now challenges

FILED

MAR 17 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
the district court’s grant of summary judgment to his former employer, Emerald

Cascade Restaurant Systems d/b/a Jack-in-the-Box, on several discrimination

claims before trial as well as the district court’s decision to reduce punitive

damages. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we reverse in part,

affirm in part, and remand.

1. The district court’s decision to reduce punitive damages is reversed and

remanded for reconsideration in light of our intervening decision in Arizona v.

ASARCO, 773 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc).

2. Cervantes argues the district court erred in granting partial summary

judgment to Emerald Cascade on his claims for retaliation, hostile work

environment, and constructive discharge. We review grants of summary judgment

de novo. F.T.C. v. Stefanchik, 559 F.3d 924, 927 (9th Cir. 2009). The district

court did not err in granting summary judgment on these three claims as they were

not advanced until Cervantes’s opposition to summary judgment and Cervantes’s

complaint did not give Emerald Cascade notice of these theories of liability, under

the “liberal notice pleading standard” of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. See Pickern v. Pier 1

Imports, Inc., 457 F.3d 963, 968-69 (9th Cir. 2006). Because “summary judgment

is not a procedural second chance to flesh out inadequate pleadings,” the district

court was correct to grant partial summary judgment on these three theories before

2
trial. See Wasco Prods., Inc. v. Southwall Techs., Inc., 435 F.3d 989, 992 (9th Cir.

2006) (quoting Fleming v. Lind-Waldock & Co., 922 F.2d 20, 24 (1st Cir. 1990)). 

3. In a footnote to his opening brief, Cervantes notes his objection to the

district court’s decision to exclude from trial a comment about flying the American

flag. But Cervantes provides no substantive argument as to how the district court

erred, so he has waived this issue on appeal. See Ghahremani v. Gonzales, 498

F.3d 993, 997-98 (9th Cir. 2007).

Each party shall bear its own costs. 

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED on the

first issue only.

3
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

                    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreement to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the                     **Federal Register**                    . A copy of the agreement is available through the Commission's Web site (                    *www.fmc.gov*) or by contacting the Office of Agreements at (202)-523-5793 or                     *tradeanalysis@fmc.gov.*

*Agreement No.:*                     011550-015.                

*Title:*                     ABC Discussion Agreement.                

*Parties:*                     Hamburg-Süd, King Ocean Services Limited, Seaboard Marine, Ltd.; and Crowley Caribbean Services, LLC.                

*Filing Party:*                     Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; Cozen O'Connor; 1200 19th Street NW., Washington, DC 20036.                

*Synopsis:*                     The amendment adds a new Article 13 suspending authority with respect to Curacao, deletes Seafreight Line as a party, and corrects the Agreement's table of contents.                

*Agreement No.:*                     012489.                

*Title:*                     CMA CGM/Marinex Cargo Line U.S. Virgin Islands—Saint Maarten Service Space Charter Agreement.                

*Parties:*                     CMA CGM S.A. and Marinex Cargo Line Inc.                

*Filing Party:*                     Draughn Arbona; CMA CGM (America) LLC; 5701 Lake Wright Drive; Norfolk, VA 23502.                

*Synopsis:*                     The Agreement authorizes Marinex Cargo Line to charter space to CMA CGM in the trade between the U.S. Virgin Islands and Saint Maarten.                

By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

Dated: August 25, 2017.

Rachel E. Dickon, 

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2017-18413 Filed 8-29-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
EXHIBIT 32.2



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of IntegraMed America, Inc. (the
     "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with
     the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I
     John W. Hlywak, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
     pursuant to 18 U.S.C. /s/ 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
     Sarbanes--Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

     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.



                                                  /s/John W. Hlywak, Jr.
                                                     --------------------------
                                                     John W. Hlywak, Jr.
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
                                                     August 12, 2005
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

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 Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Goldman Sachs BDC, Inc. (the Company) for the annual period ended December 31, 2019 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), Brendan McGovern, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Jonathan Lamm, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

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

2. The information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: February 20, 2020



|                                                                      
|----------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Brendan McGovern                                                  
|Brendan McGovern Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

Date: February 20, 2020



|                                                                                 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Jonathan Lamm                                                                
|Jonathan Lamm Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of - )

)

Rockford Corporation ) ASBCA No. 63302

)

Under Contract No. W912WJ-21-C-0009 )

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Jonathan A. DeMella, Esq.

Anne Marie Tavella, Esq.

 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

 Anchorage, AK

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Michael P. Goodman, Esq.

 Engineer Chief Trial Attorney

Theresa A. Negron, Esq.

 Engineer Trial Attorney

 U.S. Army Engineer District, New England

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: October 14, 2022

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 63302, Appeal of Rockford 

Corporation, rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: October 14, 2022

JOHN J. THRASHER

Administrative Judge

Chairman

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

In the interest of N.S., a child, * From the 326th District Court

 of Taylor County

Trial Court No. 9055-CX.

No. 11-19-00186-CV * October 31, 2019

 * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

 Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.,

 sitting by assignment) 

 (Willson, J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there 

is no error in the order below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s 

opinion, the order of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO SERVICE AGREEMENT

                                     BETWEEN

                            INTEGRAMED AMERICA, INC.

                                       AND

         NORTHWEST CENTER FOR INFERTILITY AND REPRODUCTIVE ENDOCRINOLOGY


         THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO SERVICE AGREEMENT ("Amendment No. 1"), is dated
June 14, 2002 by and between IntegraMed America, Inc., a Delaware corporation
with its principal place of business at One Manhattanville Road, Purchase, New
York 10577 ("INMD") and Northwest Center for Infertility and Reproductive
Endocrinology, a Florida general partnership, with its principal place of
business at 2825 North State Road 7, Suite 302, Margate, Florida 33063
("NCIRE"). Fertility Institute of South Florida, Inc., a Florida corporation
with its principal place of business about to be 2825 North State Road 7, Suite
302, Margate, Florida 33063 ("Subsidiary") has joined in this Agreement.

                                    RECITALS:

         INMD and NCIRE entered into a Service Agreement dated April 26, 2002
(the "Service Agreement"); and

         INMD and NCIRE wish to amend further the Service Agreement, in
pertinent part, to provide for an additional Exclusive Service Right
consideration, in light of NCIRE's acquisition of Subsidiary.

         NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
herein contained, and as contained in the Service Agreement, INMD, NCIRE and
Subsidiary agree as follows:

         1. Article 8 is hereby amended to add the following additional Section:

         "8.3 The Exclusive Service Right includes the medical practice of
Subsidiary, which was acquired by NCIRE effective June 14, 2002, in
consideration of INMD funding the acquisition of Subsidiary in the amount of
$625,000.00

         2. All representations of and covenants by NCIRE set forth in the
Service Agreement are hereby amended to include the medical practice of
Subsidiary.

         3. All other provisions of the Service Agreement, as amended, not in
conflict with this Amendment No. 1 remain in full force and effect.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Amendment No. 1 the
date first above written.


INTEGRAMED AMERICA, INC.



By:  /s/John W. Hlywak, Jr.
     ------------------------------------------
        John W. Hlywak, Jr., Sr. Vice President



NORTHWEST CENTER FOR INFERTILITY AND REPRODUCTIVE ENDOCRINOLOGY

By: WAYNE S. MAXSON, M.D., P.A., a general partner


By: /s/Wayne S. Maxon
    ------------------------------------------
       Wayne S. Maxson, M.D., President



FOREGOING  SECTION 1 IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED AND ACCEPTED:


FERTILITY INSTITUTE OF SOUTH FLORIDA, INC.


By:  /s/Wayne S. Maxon
     -------------------------------------------
        Wayne S. Maxson, M.D., President
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Monica Jones, Defendant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Abraham L. Clott, J.), rendered November 10, 2014, after a nonjury trial, convicting her of unlicensed general vending, and imposing sentence.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Judgment of conviction (Abraham L. Clott, J.), rendered November 10, 2014, affirmed.</p><p>The accusatory instrument was not jurisdictionally defective. The "public space" element of the unlicensed general vending charge (see Administrative Code of City of New York § 20—452[d]) was satisfied by sworn police allegations that defendant was engaged in specified vending activities while standing behind a folding table "in front of 435 7 Avenue" (see <a href="../2012/2012_02804.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Abdurraheem</i>, 94 AD3d 569</a>, 570 [2012], <i>lv denied </i>19 NY3d 970 [2012]; <a href="../2017/2017_51166.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Sosa</i>, 57 Misc 3d 129</a>[A], 2017 NY Slip Op 51166[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017], <i>lv denied </i>30 NY3d 1063 [2017]; <a href="../2016/2016_51634.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Jalloh</i>, 53 Misc 3d 148</a>[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51634[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 1185 [2017]<i>; People v Kasse</i>, 40 Misc 3d 126[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 51022[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2013], <i>affd </i>22 NY3d 1142 [2014]).</p><p>People v Afilal, 26 NY3d 1050 (2015), relied upon by defendant, which addressed the more narrowly defined "public place" element of the charge of criminal possession of marijuana in the fifth degree (see Penal Law §§ 221.10[1]; 240.00[1]), does not require a contrary result and is distinguishable (<a href="../2016/2016_51575.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Kellman</i>, 53 Misc 3d 145</a>[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51575[U][App Term, 1st Dept 2016], <i>lv denied </i>29 NY3d 999 [2017]). To the extent that our decision in <a href="../2016/2016_50302.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Kamara </i>(50 Misc 3d 145</a>[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 50302[U][App Term, 1st Dept 2016]), where we accepted the People's concession, holds to the contrary, it should not be followed. </p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur <br>Decision Date: June 22, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
Letter Amendment to Employment Agreement



 EXHIBIT 10.4 
  

							
	

	  		  		  	 20 William Street, Suite 310
 Wellesley, MA
02481
 781-304-1800 phone
 781-304-1701 fax
 www.stream.com


 December 29, 2008 
 Mr. R. Scott Murray 
 Stream Global Services, Inc. 
 20 William Street, Suite 310 
 Wellesley, MA 02481 
 Dear Scott: 
 To ensure compliance with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, Stream Global
Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and you hereby agree to amend the employment agreement dated as of July 15, 2008 by and between the Company and you (the “Agreement”) as follows:

 Section 10(c) is amended by inserting at the end the following: 
 “This Section 10(c) will, among other sections, apply to payments and reimbursements of expenses under Sections 3.3, 3.6, 3.7 and 9. 
 The Company will pay or reimburse business expenses in accordance with its policies but, assuming proper substantiation, no later than the last day of the
calendar year following the calendar year in which the relevant expense was incurred.” 
 The parties further agree that Section 3.2 of the
Agreement is amended to replace the $60 million Adjusted EBITDA target for earning a bonus at the full target level for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 with a $50 million Adjusted EBITDA target. This section is further amended such
that, if the Company achieves between 80% and 100% of its target Adjusted EBITDA, the Executive shall receive a pro rata portion (from 0-100%) of his target bonus. 
 Except as modified by this letter or by other intervening amendments, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This letter may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original, and all of which shall constitute one and the same document. 
  

			
	 STREAM GLOBAL SERVICE, INC.

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/    Sheila M. Flaherty

		 	Sheila M. Flaherty
		 	Chief Legal and Administrative Officer


  

	
	 Acknowledged and agreed:

	
	 /s/    R. Scott Murray

	 R. Scott Murray


 12-29-08 
 Date
Order filed, January 6, 2017

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 16

- 00982

- CR

____________ CITY OF HOUSTON , Appellant

V.

G.L. , Appellee

On Appeal from the 228th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No . 1435565



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due July 05, 2016

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Mary Mills , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
Sales and related workers

This occupational group includes cashiers, rental clerks, retail salespersons, 

advertising sales agents, travel agents, wholesale and manufacturing sales 

representatives, models, demonstrators, product promoters, sales engineers, 

real estate brokers, street vendors, and telemarketers.

Cognitive and mental requirements

The qualifications that workers need to use judgment, make decisions, interact 

with others, and adapt to changes in jobs.

In 2023, verbal interactions were required constantly (every few minutes) for 46.2 percent of sales and related workers, 

and were required not constantly, but more than once per hour for 51.1 percent.

Table 1. Percentage of sales and related workers with cognitive and mental 

requirements, 2023

Requirement Yes No

Pace: Pause control 45.5 54.5

Interaction with general public >99.5 <0.5

Working around crowds 1.8 98.2

Telework 11.9 88.1

Work review: Supervising others 11.0 89.0

Work review: Presence of supervisor 70.6 29.4

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Requirements Survey

Education, training, and experience requirements

The minimum level of formal 

education required, 

credentials necessary, on-thejob training, and prior work 

experience necessary for 

average performance in jobs.

In 2023, credentials were 

required for 27.8 percent of 

sales and related workers. 

Prior work experience was 

required for 33.2 percent and 

on-the-job training was 

required for 93.4 percent.

No minimum education was 

required for 50.7 percent of 

sales and related workers and 

a high school diploma was 

required for 39.6 percent.
Occupational Requirements Survey ●www.bls.gov/ors ●orsinfo@bls.gov ●202.691.6199

Environmental conditions

The various tangible or concrete hazards or 

difficulties that are in the vicinity of where 

jobs’ critical tasks are performed.

In 2023, 97.0 percent of sales and related 

workers were not exposed to extreme cold, 

and greater than 99.5 percent were not 

exposed to extreme heat. Wetness was not 

present for 79.4 percent, greater than 99.5 

percent were not exposed to heavy 

vibrations, and 71.9 percent were not 

exposed to the outdoors.

Physical demands

Refer to the physical activities required to 

perform tasks in jobs. The presence and, 

in some cases, duration of these activities 

are published.

In 2023, reaching at or below the 

shoulder was required for 78.3 percent of 

sales and related workers and was not 

required for 21.7 percent.

Performing work in low postures was 

required for 59.3 percent of sales and 

related workers and was not required for 

40.7 percent.

The choice to sit or stand when 

performing critical tasks was available to 

32.3 percent of sales and related 

workers. On average, workers spent 31.4 

percent of the workday sitting and 68.6 percent of the workday standing.

Table 2. Percentage of sales and related workers with physical demands, 2023

Requirement Yes No

Choice of sitting or standing 32.3 67.7

Driving 21.9 78.1

Climbing structure-related ramps or stairs 10.6 89.4

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Requirements Survey
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit (23)(c)

                  Consent of Independent Accounting Firm


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements and in the related Prospectuses of CMS Energy Corporation:

      (1)   Registration Statements (Form S-3 No. 333-125553, No. 333-52560, No.
            333-27849, No. 333-37241, No. 333-74958, No. 333-45556) of CMS
            Energy Corporation;

      (2)   Registration Statement (Form S-4 No. 33-60007 and No. 33-55805) of
            CMS Energy Corporation;

      (3)   Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-32229 and No. 333-58686)
            pertaining to the CMS Energy Corporation Performance Incentive Stock
            Plan and Executive Stock Option Plan, respectively, and

      (4)   Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-76347) pertaining to the
            Employee Savings and Incentive Plan of Consumers Energy Company;

of our Report of Independent Auditors dated February 9, 2007 relating to the
financial statements of Jorf Lasfar Energy Company S.C.A. which appears in the
CMS Energy Corporation Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
2006.


                                                /s/ Ernst & Young

Casablanca, Morocco
February 21, 2007