alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 4, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 03-10638 Summary Calendar

GLADYS MARIE GOFF Plaintiff - Appellant

VERSUS

SOUNDOLIER DIVISION OF AMERICAN TRADING AND PRODUCTION CORPORATION

Defendant - Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas

3:98-CV-2254

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Plaintiff, Glad ys Marie Goff, filed this action against
d efendant seeking relief for employment discrimination. The district court dismissed Golf’s action with prejudice on February
15, 2001 and entered final judgment that same date. Goff filed her2

notice of appeal more than two years la ter on June 25, 2003.

Because Goff’s notice of appeal from the February 15, 2001 judgment was untimely this court has no jurisdiction to review that order. Goff then filed a motion for leave to reinstate her complaint on February 14, 2003. The district court treated that motion as a
motion for relief under Rule 60(b)F.R.C.P. and denied the motion on June 19, 2003. Goff filed a timely appeal from that order.
After reviewing the record and the briefs of the parties we

are satisfied that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Goff’s Rule 60(b) motion.

AFFIRMED.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ___________ 

No. 24-50149

___________ 

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee, 

versus

State of Texas; Greg Abbott, in his official capacity as Governor of 

Texas; Texas Department of Public Safety; Steven C. 

McCraw, in his official capacity as Director of Texas Department of Public 

Safety,

Defendants—Appellants, 

____________________________ 

Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center; American 

Gateways; County of El Paso, Texas,

Plaintiffs—Appellees, 

versus

Steven C. McCraw, in his official capacity as Director of the State of 

Texas Department of Public Safety; Bill D. Hicks, in his official capacity 

as District Attorney for the 34th District,

Defendants—Appellants. 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 19, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 24-50149 Document: 121-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/19/2024
No. 24-50149

2

______________________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:24-CV-8

USDC No. 1:23-CV-1537 

______________________________ 

Before Richman, Chief Judge, Oldham, and Ramirez, Circuit 

Judges. 

Per Curiam:

Oral argument is scheduled on March 20, 2024, to consider the 

Appellants’ Motion to Stay Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal. A 

majority of the panel has concluded that the administrative stay entered by a

motions panel on March 2, 2024, should be lifted. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the administrative stay of this appeal previously 

entered by a motions panel on March 2, 2024, is DISSOLVED.

 

Case: 24-50149 Document: 121-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/19/2024
No. 24-50149

3

Andrew S. Oldham, Circuit Judge, dissenting:

A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy that alters the 

status quo. See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008); 

Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 429 (2009). A stay preserves the status quo 

while an appellate court reviews the lawfulness of that alteration. Nken, 556 

U.S. at 429. Earlier today, the Supreme Court of the United States restored 

an administrative stay so our panel could review the State’s request for 

emergency relief under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 8. See United 

States v. Texas, No. 23A814 (U.S. Mar. 19, 2024) (Mem.). I would leave that 

stay in place pending tomorrow’s oral argument on the question. 

Case: 24-50149 Document: 121-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/19/2024
EXHIBIT 10:22



Confidential portions of this document indicated by ***** have been omitted and filed separately with the Commission



AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR WHOLESALE

FINANCING

(Amendment No. 3)



This Amendment to Amended and Restated Agreement for Wholesale Financing
(Amendment) is made by and between Deutsche Financial Services Corporation (DFS) and Featherlite Mfg., Inc. (Dealer).



WHEREAS, DFS and Dealer entered into that certain Amended and Restated
Agreement for Wholesale Financing dated October 6, 1997, as amended by that certain Amendment to Amended and Restated Agreement for Wholesale Financing (Amendment No. 1) dated April 1, 1998, and that certain Amendment to Amended and Restated
Agreement for Wholesale Financing (Amendment No. 2) dated May 8, 1998 (together, the )Agreement); and



WHEREAS, DFS and Dealer desire to amend the Agreement as provided herein.



NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, DFS and Dealer agree as follows:



1. Amendment of Current Ratio. Paragraph 13.1 (c)of the Agreement is deleted and amended to read in its entirety as follows:



(C) A RATIO OF Current Tangible Assets to current liabilities of not less than ONE AND ONE-HALF to ONE (1.5:1).



2. No Other Modifications. Except as expressly modified
or amended herein, all other terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect and the Agreement, as hereby amended, is ratified and confirmed by DFS and Dealer.



3. Capitalized Terms.Except as otherwise defined herein, all
capitalized terms will have the same meanings set forth in the Agreement.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, DFS and Dealer have executed this Amendment as of the 25thday
of March, 2000.



DEUTSCHE FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION



|                       |  |                            
|---------------------- |  | ---------------------------
|By:                    |  | \s\ Leonard F. Buchan      
|                       |  | Leonard F. Buchan          
|                       |  | Vice President             
|                      
|FEATHERLITE MFG., INC.
|                       | 
|By:                    |  | \s\ C. Clement             
|                       |  | Conrad D. Clement President
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.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 10165]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects to be included in the exhibition “The Arch of Titus—from Jerusalem to Rome, and Back,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Yeshiva University Museum, New York, New York, from on                               ( print page 48307)                            or about October 27, 2017, until on or about January 14, 2018, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        For further information, including a list of the imported objects, contact Elliot Chiu in the Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, SA-5, Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257-1 of December 11, 2015). I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Alyson Grunder,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2017-22409 Filed 10-16-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
Exhibit-23.1
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
AMCON Distributing Company on Form S-8, filed on September 7, 2000, of our
reports dated January 7, 2005(which report expresses an unqualified opinion
and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the change in method of
accounting for goodwill and intangibles assets in 2003) appearing in and
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of AMCON
Distributing Company and subsidiaries for the fiscal year ended September 24,
2004.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Omaha, Nebraska

January 7, 2005
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 24
- 00403
- CV

Venky Venkatraman , Appellant

v. Board of Law Examiners , Appellee

FROM THE 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D
- 1
- GN
- 24
- 000808 , THE HONORABLE LAURIE EISERLOH , JUDGE PRESID I NG

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Venky Venkatraman attempts to appeal from a n order signed by the trial court on May 21 , 2024, that den ied his request for an emergency hearing on his “ Motion Asking to Set
Aside Defendant ’ s Order. ” Appellee th e Texas Board of Law Examiners has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction , asserting that the order at issue is not a final order

or otherwise appealable in terlocutory order. We agree with the Board and grant the motion

to dismiss.
N o final order or judgment appears in the record. In civil cases, Texas court s of appeals generally have jurisdiction over appeals only from final judgments. S e e Lehmann v.
Har

– Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) ; see also Tex. Civ. Prac. & R em
. Code § 51.012

. We also have jurisdiction to consider appeals of interlocutory or ders , but on ly if a statute explicitly provides appella te jurisdiction. Stary v. DeBord , 967 S.W.2d 352, 352

– 532

(Tex. 1998); see also Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014

. N o statute provid es this Court with appellat e jurisdiction over an interlo c utory order denying a request for an emergency hearing on a motion seeking to set aside an order iss ued by appellee.

W e therefore lack jurisdiction over this appeal a nd ac cordingl y dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

__________________________________________ Thomas J. Bak er , Justice
Before Justices Baker, Smith, and Theofanis
Di smissed for Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: July 12, 2024
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

224 

KA 12-00721 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V ORDER

DONALD A., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

WAGNER & HART, LLP, OLEAN (JANINE C. FODOR OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

LORI P. RIEMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LITTLE VALLEY, FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an adjudication of the Cattaraugus County Court

(Larry M. Himelein, J.), rendered October 17, 2011. Defendant was

adjudicated a youthful offender. 

Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance

signed by defendant on November 11, 2012 and by the attorneys for the

parties on December 10 and December 14, 2012, 

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed 

upon stipulation.

Entered: March 15, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
#### Patricia Ann FRALICK, Plaintiff-Appellee v. PLUMBERS AND PIPEFITTERS NATIONAL PENSION FUND, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-10711

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 28, 2011.

David Stanley Jones, Esq., Principal Litigation Counsel, Law Offices of David S. Jones, James Michael Klancnik, Esq., James M. Klancnik, P.C., Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Sally M. Tedrow, Randall Richard Hopp, Esq., O’Donoghue & O’Donoghue, Washington, DC, Andrew George Jubinsky, Figari *&*Davenport, L.L.P., Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

After having reviewed the record and studied the briefs, we affirm the judgment of the district court for essentially the same reasons given by the district court in its Memorandum Opinion and Order of June 28, 2010.

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>               AUG-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                 JUL-31-1996
<CASH>                          5,995
<SECURITIES>                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                  54,655
<ALLOWANCES>                      980
<INVENTORY>                    41,403
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              105,028
<PP&E>                        108,679
<DEPRECIATION>                 24,473
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                295,740 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          82,759
<BONDS>                       125,000 
<COMMON>                          294
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               0
<PREFERRED>                         0
<OTHER-SE>                       (520)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  295,740  
<SALES>                       344,847  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              344,847  
<CGS>                         277,588  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 324,529
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>             21,283 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (8,173)
<INCOME-TAX>                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            (4,953)
<DISCONTINUED>                  3,220
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     0
<CHANGES>                           0
<NET-INCOME>                   (8,173)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                    (.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                    (.32)
        


</TABLE>
#### Viola Thomas et al., Respondents, v First Baptist Church of Westbury, N. Y., Inc., Appellant.

[666 NYS2d 485]

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DeMaro, J.), dated January 16, 1997, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

Before a landowner can be held liable for a hazardous condition created by the accumulation of snow or ice during a storm, a reasonable time for taking corrective measures after the cessation of the storm must pass *(see, Fuks v New York City Tr. Auth.,*243 AD2d 678; *Flanagan v City of New York,*243 AD2d 677; *Siegel v Molino,*236 AD2d 879; *Wall v Village of Mineola,*237 AD2d 511; *Perlicz v Redeemer Lutheran Church,*229 AD2d 378). In the instant case, the evidence established that the injured plaintiff slipped and fell in an area which was covered with new-fallen snow, and that it was still snowing when she fell. Thus, the defendant is entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint *(see, Fuks v New York City Tr. Auth.,*
      *502
      *supra; Flanagan v City of New York, supra; Siegel v Molino, supra; Wall v Village of Mineola, supra).*Bracken, J. P., Pizzuto, Altman, Krausman and Lerner, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3215 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3215

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the National 
 Park Service Superintendent of the Everglades National Park, to allow 
 individuals to hunt and kill Burmese pythons within the boundaries of 
                               that Park.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 14, 2009

  Mr. Rooney introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the National 
 Park Service Superintendent of the Everglades National Park, to allow 
 individuals to hunt and kill Burmese pythons within the boundaries of 
                               that Park.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION TO HUNT AND KILL BURMESE PYTHONS IN EVERGLADES 
              NATIONAL PARK.

    The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the National Park 
Service Superintendent of the Everglades National Park, may authorize 
individuals to hunt and kill Burmese pythons (Python molurus 
bivittatus) within the boundaries of that Park.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit
32.2





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





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and in connection with the filing by Uni Core
Holdings Corporation, a Wyoming Corporation (the “Company”) with the Securities
and Exchange Commission of its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three
months ended March 31, 2010 (the “Report”), the undersigned, Thomas Lee, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, that to the best of his
knowledge:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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.





This certification is being provided
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be deemed a part of this Report, nor is
it to be deemed to be “filed” for any purpose whatsoever.


Date:
      May 16,
      2010
                  By:
                  /s/ Thomas
      LeeThomas
      LeeChief
      Financial Officer


A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.1



Certification



I, Brett C. Brewer, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of eUniverse Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors:



a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting.



|Date: October 30, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/ Brett C. Brewer                      
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------
|                       |  |  |  | Brett C. Brewer                          
|                       |  |  |  | President and Principal Executive Officer
|                       |  |  |  | (Principal Executive Officer)            



25
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 19

- 00214

- CV

E STATE OF J OHN D AVID H ARRIS

, D ECEASED §

§

§

§ On Appeal from Probate Court No. 2

of Tarrant County (2011

- PR00903

- 1

- 2)

August 8, 2019

Per Curiam

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and hold s that the

appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for want of

jurisdiction

.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM