alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

1 Although the City of Mansfield urges that we lack

jurisdiction to consider the appeal on the basis that the district

court’s order dismissing the claims against the City was

interlocutory and not certified by the district court under Federal

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-10296

Summary Calendar

 

RODERICK LADELL BONNER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CITY OF MANSFIELD, TEXAS; MONTE ROBERTS, Police Officer;

JESUS VALLES; and DAVID GRIFFIN,

Defendants-Appellees.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:01-CV-760-A

 

November 1, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Roderick Ladell Bonner, Texas prisoner #1057449, proceeding

pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals the district court’s Rule

54(b) final judgment dismissing his § 1983 claims against the City

of Mansfield for failure to state a claim.1 Because Bonner fails
Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the district court’s Final Judgment

as to Certain Defendant, entered the same day as its order

dismissing Bonner’s claims against the City, is a Rule 54(b) final

judgment, as the accompanying order dismissing the claims makes “an

express determination that there is no just reason for delay” and

includes “an express direction for the entry of judgment.” FED. R.

CIV. P. 54(b).

2 Price v. Roark, 256 F.3d 364, 368 n.2 (5th Cir. 2001). To

the extent that Bonner is appealing any other order of the district

court, such orders would be interlocutory and thus we have no

jurisdiction to consider such an appeal. Briargrove Shopping Ctr.

Joint Venture v. Pilgrim Enter., Inc., 170 F.3d 536, 538 (5th Cir.

1999).

3 5TH CIR. R. 42.2 (“If upon [review], it appears to the court

that the appeal is frivolous and entirely without merit, the appeal

will be dismissed.”).

2

to present any argument in his opening brief regarding the only

appealable issue–the propriety of the district court’s dismissal of

his claims against the City of Mansfield–the issue is abandoned.2

Bonner’s appeal is without merit and therefore frivolous. On this

basis, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED.3 

We caution Bonner that any additional frivolous appeals filed

by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions.

To avoid sanctions, Bonner is cautioned to review any pending

appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are

frivolous. All outstanding motions are DENIED.
Exhibit 13(a)

906 Certification

The certification set
forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2015 (the Report) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

Richard Solomons, the Chief
Executive Officer, and Paul Edgecliffe-Johnson, the Chief Financial Officer of InterContinental Hotels Group PLC, each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



|1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of InterContinental Hotels Group PLC.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 3 March 2016



By:/s/ Richard SolomonsName:

Richard SolomonsTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerBy:/s/ Paul Edgecliffe-JohnsonName:

Paul Edgecliffe-JohnsonTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2897 

To require the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to prevent the dissemination to the public of certain information with respect 

to noncommercial flights of private aircraft owners and operators. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 

Mr. POMPEO (for himself, Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina, Mr. GRAVES of Missouri, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Ms. JENKINS, Mr. 

LONG, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. SCHOCK, Mr. FLORES, 

Mr. HUELSKAMP, Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois, and Mr. BARROW) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To require the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to prevent the dissemination to the public of 

certain information with respect to noncommercial flights 

of private aircraft owners and operators. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘BARR Preservation 

5 Act of 2011’’. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2897 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON DISSEMINATION OF CERTAIN PRI2 VATE AIRCRAFT REGISTRATION NUMBERS TO 

3 THE PUBLIC. 

4 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 

5 (1) The Federal Government’s dissemination to 

6 the public of information relating to a noncommer7 cial flight carried out by a private owner or operator 

8 of an aircraft, whether during or following the flight, 

9 does not serve a public policy objective. 

10 (2) Upon the request of a private owner or op11 erator of an aircraft, the Federal Government should 

12 not disseminate to the public information relating to 

13 noncommercial flights carried out by that owner or 

14 operator, as the information should be private and 

15 confidential. 

16 (b) PROHIBITION.— 

17 (1) IN GENERAL.—Upon the request of a pri18 vate owner or operator of an aircraft, the Adminis19 trator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall 

20 require that, with respect to the noncommercial 

21 flights of that owner or operator, the display of that 

22 owner or operator’s aircraft registration number is 

23 blocked in aircraft situational display data available 

24 to the public. 

25 (2) AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION TO GOV26 ERNMENT AGENCIES.—Paragraph (1) does not afVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:46 Sep 14, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2897.IH H2897

emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2897 IH

1 fect the authority of the Administrator to make air2 craft registration numbers available to Federal, 

3 State, or local government agencies. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

#### Richmond Education Association of Richmond, Inc., et al. v. School Board of the City of Richmond et al.

February 10, 1976

Case No. D-9028

By JUDGE RICHARD L. WILLIAMS

After considering your respective memoranda, reviewing other applicable authorities, stipulations of counsel, and other filings in the above-captioned case, I have concluded that petitioners are entitled to an order declaring that Ordinance 75-248-231 passed by the City Council of the City of Richmond is not binding on the School Board of the City of Richmond.

School boards in Virginia are constitutionally and statutorily created as independent local agencies to establish, maintain, and operate school systems. Art. VIII, Sect. 7, of the Constitution of Virginia, and | 22-97 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. This authority has been further refined and reinforced by decisional law from the Supreme Court of Virginia. *Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County*v. *School Board of Chesterfield*County, 182 Va. 266 (1944). Nothing could be more indigenous to the management and control of school funds than deciding what payroll deductions will be made from teachers* salaries. The School Board cannot avoid this responsibility by claiming that an ordinance adopted by City Council on the general subject of payroll deductions, sweeping in nature and bearing no rational relationship to the operation of a school system, is self-executing and, therefore, binding on it.

*520Counsel are requested to submit a decree declaring what the rights of the parties are without the restrictions imposed by Ordinance 75-248-231.
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**As Adopted Pursuant To**

**Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-OxleyAct Of 2002**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 (as adoptedpursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, the undersigned interimChief Executive Officer of VirtualFund.com, Inc. (the “Company”), herebycertify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal yearended June 30, 2001 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and thatinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  December 19, 2002 |                                                                                            | /s/ Joseph D. Pupel |
|-------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------|
|                          | Joseph D. Pupel,                                                                                |
|                          | Interim Chief Executive  Officer (principal executive officer and principal accounting officer) |

 

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6845

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. WENDELL WOOD, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:93-cr-00090-3)

Submitted: August 28, 2009 Decided: September 10, 2009

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wendell Wood, Appellant Pro Se. Howard Jacob Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorney, Ne wport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Wendell Wood appeals the district court’s orders summarily denying his motion to reopen the appeal period and

motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the orders of

the district court. See United States v. Wood , No. 2:93-cr00090-3 (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 13, 2009 & entered Mar. 16, 2009; filed Apr. 16, 2009 & entered Apr. 17, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32.2

                                CERTIFICATION OF
                           CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF
                           GOLD BANC CORPORATION, INC.

     I,  Rick  J.  Tremblay,  Chief  Financial Officer of Gold Banc Corporation,
Inc.,  hereby  certify,  in  accordance  with  18  U.S.C.  Sec. 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that:

     (a)  The  Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June
          30,  2003,  which  accompanies this certification, fully complies with
          the  requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
          Act  of  1934,  as  amended;  and

     (b)  The information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
          quarterly  period  ended  June  30,  2003,  which  accompanies  this
          certification,  fairly  presents,  in  all  material  respects,  the
          financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  of  Gold  Banc
          Corporation,  Inc.

Dated:  August  14,  2003.

                                     By: /s/  RickJ.  Tremblay
                                         --------------------------------------
                                         Rick  J.  Tremblay
                                         Chief  Financial  Officer


                                       35
<PAGE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FIRST
QUARTER FORM 10-Q FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM JULY 1, 2000 THROUGH DECEMBER
31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             636
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,964
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,048
<INVENTORY>                                     41,201
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,515
<PP&E>                                          50,480
<DEPRECIATION>                                  20,559
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 182,519
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,799
<BONDS>                                        134,354
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           48,589
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                    (41,502)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   182,519
<SALES>                                         27,682
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                27,682
<CGS>                                           19,759
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,759
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,036
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    55
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,114
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,227)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,768)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,459)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,459)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.24)


</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #15298 and #15299; PUERTO RICO Disaster Number PR-00029]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 2.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-4336-DR), dated 09/10/2017.

*Incident:*                         Hurricane Irma.                    

*Incident Period:*                         09/05/2017 through 09/07/2017.                    

# DATES:

Issued on 09/18/2017.

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         11/09/2017.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/11/2018.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, dated 09/10/2017, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 09/05/2017 through 09/07/2017.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

James E. Rivera,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2017-20735 Filed 9-27-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-17-00704-CV

Russell J.G. AMSBERRY,

Appellant

v.

Alejandra SALAZAR,

Appellee

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011-CI-17196

Honorable Angelica Jimenez, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE BARNARD, AND JUSTICE ALVAREZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is 

AFFIRMED. It is ORDERED that appellee recover her costs of appeal from appellant. 

SIGNED December 12, 2018.

_____________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Charles & Colvard, Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Robert S. Thomas, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert S. Thomas                 
|Robert S. Thomas                     
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|July 31, 2006                        

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Charles &
Colvard, Ltd. and will be retained by Charles & Colvard, Ltd. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



27
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Koontz, Bray and Senior Judge Hodges 

JOSE ALONZO FLORES 

v. Record No. 0029-95-4 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 PER CURIAM 

TITO CONTRACTORS MAY 30, 1995 

AND 

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY 

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Atiq R. Ahmed, on brief), for appellant. Appellant 

submitting on brief. 

 No brief for appellees. 

 Atiq R. Ahmed, attorney for Jose Alonzo Flores, deceased, 

and his beneficiaries, appeals a decision of the Workers' 

Compensation Commission which denied Ahmed's petition for 

attorney's fees of $12,000. Finding no error, we affirm the 

decision. 

 "Code § 65.1-102 [now Code § 65.2-714] provides that the 

fees of attorneys shall be subject to the approval and award of 

the Commission." Hudock v. Industrial Comm'n, 1 Va. App. 474, 

477, 340 S.E.2d 168, 171 (1986).1 In assessing Ahmed's petition, 

the commission properly considered, inter alia, the absence of 

significant dispute among the parties, the absence of any 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 

 1As the commission correctly noted, Ahmed had been awarded 

$600 in attorney's fees at the time the award for death benefits 

was entered by the commission on June 17, 1994. 
 2 

appreciable benefit to Flores or his beneficiaries resulting from 

Ahmed's services, and the substantial time expended by Ahmed on 

non-legal matters. See id. at 478-79, 340 S.E.2d at 171. These 

factors, together with the entire record, provide ample support 

for limiting the award of attorney's fees to $500. 

 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the commission's 

opinion, we find no abuse of discretion by the commission and 

affirm the decision. 

 Affirmed.
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).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SURINDER P. SINGH,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-70951

Agency No. A075-256-411

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 19, 2012 ** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Surinder P. Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of a

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture

FILED

DEC 28 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-70951

(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial

evidence the agency’s factual findings, Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d

995, 998 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that conditions have

changed in India such that Singh no longer has a well-founded fear of persecution. 

See id. at 1000-01. The agency rationally construed the recent country reports and

provided a sufficiently individualized analysis of Singh’s situation. See id. 

Accordingly, Singh’s asylum claim fails.

Because Singh did not demonstrate his eligibility for asylum, it follows that

he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See id.

at 1001 n.5.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s denial of CAT protection because

Singh failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be tortured in India. See

Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 993 (9th Cir. 2003). Singh’s contention that the

agency did not conduct a proper CAT analysis is not supported by the record. 

Finally, we lack jurisdiction to consider Singh’s humanitarian asylum claim

because he failed to raise this issue before the BIA. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d

1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.