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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JERRI JOETTE TILLETT, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT; et 

al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-35399 

D.C. No. 1:16-cv-00148-SPW-TJC 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 9, 2017**

Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Jerri Joette Tillett appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying her

motion for a preliminary injunction in her action challenging the Bureau of Land 

Management, Interior Board of Land Appeals, and the United States Department of 

the Interior’s (collectively, “BLM”) management of the Pryor Mountain Wild 

 

* 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

AUG 17 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-35399 

Horse Range (“PMWHR”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a). We 

review for an abuse of discretion. Jackson v. City & County of San Francisco, 746 

F.3d 953, 958 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Tillett’s request for 

preliminary injunctive relief. See id. (setting forth standard for issuance of 

preliminary injunction). Tillett failed to demonstrate that she would likely suffer 

irreparable harm from the use of control burns on the PMWHR in light of BLM’s 

agreement to delay implementing such control burn measures until at least 

September 2017. See Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 

1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[A]n injunction cannot issue merely because it is 

possible that there will be an irreparable injury to the plaintiff; it must be likely that 

there will be.”). Tillett also failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the 

merits of her challenge to the use of pesticides and herbicides on the PMWHR in 

light of the district court’s prior denial of her nearly identical claims. See

Headwaters Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 399 F.3d 1047, 1052 (9th Cir. 2005) (setting 

forth test for application of the doctrine of res judicata).

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

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

We do not consider documents and facts not presented to the district court. 

See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts 
3 17-35399 

not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).

We reject as unsupported by the record Tillett’s contentions regarding 

alleged judicial misconduct.

AFFIRMED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner

v.

NEIL ROBERT GELB,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 2598 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 174 DB 2018

Attorney Registration No. 60543

(Philadelphia)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 20 th day of May , 2019, upon consideration of the Recommendation

of the Three

- Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board, the Joint Petition in Support of

Discipline on Consent is granted , and Neil Robert Gelb is suspended on consent from the

Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of eighteen months . Respondent shall comply

with all the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant

to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3008 

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide for the reissuance 

of Social Security account numbers to children in cases in which the 

confidentiality of the number has been compromised by reason of theft. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 

Mr. MARCHANT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide 

for the reissuance of Social Security account numbers 

to children in cases in which the confidentiality of the 

number has been compromised by reason of theft. 

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 ‘‘Social Security Child 

5 Protection Act of 2011’’. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3008 IH

1 SEC. 2. REISSUANCE OF SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT NUM2 BERS TO YOUNG CHILDREN IN CASES WHERE 

3 CONFIDENTIALITY HAS BEEN COMPROMISED 

4 BY REASON OF THEFT. 

5 Section 205(c)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 

6 U.S.C. 405(c)(2)(B)) is amended— 

7 (1) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv); 

8 and 

9 (2) by inserting after clause (ii) the following 

10 new clause: 

11 ‘‘(iii) In any case in which a Social Security account 

12 number has been issued to a child pursuant to subclause 

13 (IV) or (V) of clause (i) and it is demonstrated to the 

14 Commissioner of Social Security by a parent or guardian 

15 of the child that, in the course of transmission of docu16 mentation of such number to the child, the confidentiality 

17 of such number has been compromised by reason of theft 

18 of such documentation, the Commissioner shall issue a 

19 new Social Security account number to such child and 

20 make note in the records maintained with respect to such 

21 child of the pertinent information received by the Commis22 sioner regarding the theft of the documentation of the 

23 original number.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
exhibit10_10.htm


Exhibit 10.10


THIRD AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This THIRD AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into effective as of December 15, 2010, by and between Forward Air Corporation, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Tennessee (the “Company”), and Bruce A. Campbell (the “Executive”).


 


WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive entered into an Employment Agreement, effective as of October 30, 2007, as amended (the “Employment Agreement”);


 


WHEREAS, section 11(c) of the Employment Agreement specifies that the Employment Agreement may be amended only by an instrument in writing signed by the parties;


 


WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive find it mutually desirable and in the best interests of the parties to amend the Employment Agreement to adjust the base salary floor and to enable payment of any bonus earned for a calendar year to be paid between December 1st of such year and March 15th of the following year.


 


For and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree to amend the Employment Agreement as follows:


 


1.           Section 6(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:


 


“(a)           BASE SALARY.  An annual base salary (“Base Salary”) of not less than Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00), subject to adjustment annually in the discretion of the Compensation Committee.  Executive’s Base Salary will be consistent with the salaries of the chief executive officers for companies within a peer group chosen by the Compensation Committee.  Executive’s Base Salary shall be payable in accordance with the Company’s regular payroll practices in effect from time to time for executive officers of the Company.”


 


2.           The last sentence of Section 6(b) is hereby amended to read as follows:


 


“The Year-End Bonus for each calendar year, if any, shall be paid, in one or more installments, to Executive on or after December 1st of that year, but by no later than March 15th of the immediately succeeding year.”


 


3.           In all other respects, the Employment Agreement is hereby ratified and confirmed.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company and the Executive have executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.


 


 




	  	By:  	
/s/ Bruce A. Campbell


	  	  	
Bruce A. Campbell









 




	 	  	FORWARD AIR CORPORATION  
	  	By:  	
/s/ Rodney L. Bell


	  	
 


Its: 

	
Rodney L. Bell


Chief Financial Officer, Senior Vice President and Treasurer
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 297 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 297

To require amounts remaining in Members' representational allowances at 
the end of a fiscal year to be used for deficit reduction or to reduce 
               the Federal debt, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 18, 2011

   Mr. Camp introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require amounts remaining in Members' representational allowances at 
the end of a fiscal year to be used for deficit reduction or to reduce 
               the Federal debt, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REQUIRING AMOUNTS REMAINING IN MEMBERS' REPRESENTATIONAL 
              ALLOWANCES TO BE USED FOR DEFICIT REDUCTION OR TO REDUCE 
              THE FEDERAL DEBT.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 
amounts appropriated for the Members' Representational Allowance of a 
Member of the House of Representatives for a fiscal year which remain 
after all payments are made under such Allowance for the year shall be 
deposited in the Treasury and used for deficit reduction, except that 
in the case of a fiscal year for which there is no Federal budget 
deficit, such amounts shall be used to reduce the Federal debt (in such 
manner as the Secretary of the Treasury considers appropriate).
    (b) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect to 
fiscal year 2011 and each succeeding fiscal year.

SEC. 2. PUBLICATION REQUIREMENT.

    After each session of Congress or other period for which the 
Members' Representational Allowance is made available, there shall be 
published in the Congressional Record a statement showing, with respect 
to such session or period, the amount deposited with respect to each 
Member under section 1 and the total deposited with respect to all 
Members.

SEC. 3. REGULATIONS.

    The Committee on House Administration of the House of 
Representatives shall have authority to prescribe regulations to carry 
out this Act.

SEC. 4. DEFINITION.

    As used in this Act, the term ``Member of the House of 
Representatives'' means a Representative in, or a Delegate or Resident 
Commissioner to, the Congress.
                                 <all>
```
The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western

1

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-2955

___________

Vance E. Tivis, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Missouri.

Dora Schriro * 

* [Unpublished]

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: April 7, 1997

 Filed: April 24, 1997

___________

Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Vance E. Tivis, a Missouri inmate, appeals the district court's1

denial of his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion seeking relief

from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. As Tivis has not alleged

or demonstrated "exceptional circumstances" warranting extraordinary

relief, we conclude the district court did not
-2-

abuse its discretion in denying Tivis's Rule 60(b) motion. See Robinson

v. Armontrout, 8 F.3d 6, 7 (8th Cir. 1993) (standard of review; Rule 60(b)

factors warranting relief); Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 862 F.2d 161, 169

(8th Cir. 1988) (appeal from denial of Rule 60(b) motion does not raise

underlying judgment for review).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND> This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
         Company's balance sheets and related statements of operations for the
         year ended September 30, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by
         reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000

<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          2,178
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   4,362
<ALLOWANCES>                                      264
<INVENTORY>                                     7,499
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               15,854
<PP&E>                                         12,577
<DEPRECIATION>                                  5,235
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 25,160
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           7,796
<BONDS>                                        17,753
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                    36,513
<COMMON>                                       11,153
<OTHER-SE>                                    (45,464)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   25,160
<SALES>                                        71,043
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               71,043
<CGS>                                          36,137
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  36,137
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               35,592
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   20
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              1,823
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,687)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   17,474
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (32,653)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (32,653)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.67)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.67)





</TABLE>
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issuedour reports dated March 15, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements, schedule, and internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Transcend Services, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the year ended December 31, 2010. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of the Company on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-106454, effective June 25, 2003, 033-59115 effectiveMay 5, 1995, 333-116910 effective June 28, 2004, 333-131059 effective January 17, 2006, 333-157780 effective March 9, 2009, and 333-160905 effective July 30, 2009), Form S-8 POS, File No. 333-116911, effectiveMarch 13, 2006 and Forms S-3 (File No. 333-106446, effective September 29, 2003 and 333-162106, effective December 4, 2009). 

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP 

Atlanta, Georgia 

March 15, 2011 

 
1
EXHIBIT 11.1

 

**CALCULATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE**

 

 
| BEGINNING BALANCE |          | 19,994,257       |
|-------------------|---------------|------------------|
|              |          |             |   |
|              | NO. OF SHARES | CONTRIBUTION TO  | ENDING |
| DATE              | ISSUED        | WEIGHTED AVERAGE | BALANCE |
|              |          |             |   |
| January 12, 2005  | 428,250       |             | 409,426 |   | 20,403,683 |   |
| February 17, 2005 | 12,000        |             | 9,890 |   | 20,413,573 |   |
| March 3, 2005     | 1,000         |             | 773 |   | 20,414,346 |   |
| March 4, 2005     | 305,000       |             | 234,615 |   | 20,648,961 |   |
| March 8, 2005     | 10,000        |             | 7,546 |   | 20,656,507 |   |
| April 5, 2005     | 107,232       |             | 69,917 |   | 20,726,424 |   |
| May 3, 2005       | 1,686,250     |             | 926,511 |   | 21,652,935 |   |
| May 5, 2005       | 2,000         |             | 1,084 |   | 21,654,019 |   |

 

 
| Loss for the period     | $2,005,069 |
|-------------------------|------------|
| Weighted average shares | 21,654,019 |
| Net Loss per share      | $(0.09)    |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       2,983,264
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  194,264
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,177,528
<PP&E>                                      19,692,600
<DEPRECIATION>                              11,958,429
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,941,033
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          185,984
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,755,049
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,941,033
<SALES>                                      5,032,406
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,778,248
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,173,594
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                604,654
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            604,654
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   604,654
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    19.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    19.23


</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2930 

To amend the securities laws to provide for registration exemptions for 

certain crowdfunded securities, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 

Mr. MCHENRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the securities laws to provide for registration 

exemptions for certain crowdfunded securities, and for 

other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Entrepreneur Access 

5 to Capital Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CROWDFUNDING EXEMPTION. 

7 (a) SECURITIES ACT OF 1933.—Section 4 of the Se8 curities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77d) is amended by add9 ing at the end the following: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2930 IH

1 ‘‘(6) transactions involving the issuance of secu2 rities for which— 

3 ‘‘(A) the aggregate annual amount raised 

4 through the issue of the securities is 

5 $5,000,000 or less; and 

6 ‘‘(B) individual investments in the securi7 ties are limited to an aggregate annual amount 

8 equal to the lesser of— 

9 ‘‘(i) $10,000; and 

10 ‘‘(ii) 10 percent of the investor’s an11 nual income.’’. 

12 (b) VERIFICATION OF INCOME.—For purposes of sec13 tion 4(6) of the Securities Act of 1933, an issuer may rely 

14 on certifications provided by investors. 

15 SEC. 3. EXCLUSION OF CROWDFUNDING INVESTORS FROM 

16 SHAREHOLDER CAP. 

17 Section 12(g)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 

18 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78l(g)(5)) is amended— 

19 (1) by striking ‘‘For the purposes’’ and insert20 ing: 

21 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For the purposes’’; 

22 and 

23 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

24 ‘‘(B) EXCLUSION FOR PERSONS HOLDING

25 CERTAIN SECURITIES.—For purposes of this 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2930 IH

1 subsection, the term ‘held of record’ shall not 

2 include holders of securities issued pursuant to 

3 transactions described under section 4(6) of the 

4 Securities Act of 1933.’’. 

5 SEC. 4. PREEMPTION OF STATE LAW. 

6 Section 18(b)(4) of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 

7 U.S.C. 77r(b)(4)) is amended— 

8 (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) and 

9 (D) as (D) and (E), respectively; and 

10 (2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the fol11 lowing: 

12 ‘‘(C) section 4(6);’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-64693 and 333-75581) and Form S-8 (No.
333-94306, 333-02378, 333-28405, 333-67031, 333-76923, 333-84687, 333-95721,
333-56498, and 333-61022) of Legato Systems, Inc of our report dated January 25,
2002, except as to Note 10, which is as of February 20, 2002, relating to the
consolidated financial statements, which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

San Jose, California
March 14, 2002
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-17-0000552 20-MAR-2019 08:49 AM