alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Brenda K. BEAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 09-55135.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 16, 2010.*

Filed Nov. 22, 2010.

Brenda K. Beal, Barstow, CA, pro se.

Katherine M. Hikida, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Brenda K. Beal appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment awarding her damages on her claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for clear error the district court’s damages determination. *Shaw v. United States,*741 F.2d 1202, 1205 (9th Cir.1984). We affirm.

The district court did not clearly err in its calculation of damages because its award of $35,000 was not so disproportionate to the evidence as to shock the conscience. *See Yako v. United States,*891 F.2d 738, 745 (9th Cir.1989) (looking to relevant state’s case law in reviewing an award of damages); *Johnson v. Stanhiser,*72 Cal.App.4th 357, 361, 85 Cal.Rptr.2d 82 (1999) (appellate court may interfere with trier of fact’s damages determination “only where the sum awarded is so disproportionate to the evidence as to suggest that the verdict was the result of passion, prejudice, or corruption, or where the award is so out of proportion to the evidence that it shocks the conscience”).

Beal’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EXHIBIT 32.2
                                  ------------

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Vyta Corp
for  the  quarter  ended  March 31, 2006, I, Kristi J. Kampmann, Chief Financial
Officer  of  Vyta  Corp  hereby  certify  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, to my
knowledge,  that:

     a)   such Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-QSB  of Vyta Corp for the quarter
          ended  March 31, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of section
          13(a)  or  15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

     b)   the information  contained  in  such  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB
          of Vyta Corp for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, fairly presents, in
          all  material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and  results  of
          operations  of  Vyta  Corp.


                                        /s/Kristi J. Kampmann
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Kristi J. Kampmann,
                                          Chief Financial Officer

Date:  May  22,  2006

          A  signed  original  of  this  written  statement  required by Section
          906  has  been provided to Vyta Corp and will be retained by Vyta Corp
          and  furnished  to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
          upon  request.
#### KRISTY WILCOX ET AL. *v.*DANIEL S. SCHWARTZ ET AL.

The defendants’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 119 Conn. App. 808 (AC 30682), is granted, limited to the following issue:

*909The Supreme Court docket number is SC 18607.

*Frank H. Santoro*and *Jonathan A. Kocienda,*in support of the petition.

*Steven J. Errante*and *Marisa A. Bellair,*in opposition.

Decided May 5, 2010

> “Did the Appellate Court properly reverse the trial court’s dismissal of the present case for failure to comply with the ‘detailed basis’ requirement of General Statutes § 52-190a (a)?”
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.3

 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 Annual Report of TechTeam Global, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc J.
Lichtman, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

Date: March 16, 2006                        /s/ Marc J. Lichtman
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Marc J. Lichtman
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 13, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10030-10031]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3599]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice

[[Page 10031]]

is hereby given of the following meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special 
Emphasis Panel ``Develop Methods for Gathering Data and Completing 
Social Network Analysis in Drug Abuse Prevention''.
    Date: February 15, 2001.
    Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center, 9751 
Washingtonian Boulevard, Gaithersburg, MD 20878.
    Contact Person: Lyle Furr, Contract Review Specialist, Office of 
Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National 
Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC 
9547, Bethesda, MD 20892-9547, (301) 435-1439.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special 
Emphasis Panel ``Prevention Training''.
    Date: March 1, 2001.
    Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center, 9751 
Washingtonian Boulevard, Gaithersburg, MD 20878.
    Contact Person: Lyle Furr, Contract Review Specialist, Office of 
Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National 
Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC 
9547, Bethesda, MD 20892-9547, (301) 435-1439.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.277, Drug 
Abuse Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, Scientist 
Development Awards, and Research Scientist Awards; 93.278, Drug 
Abuse National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 
93.279, Drug Abuse Research Programs, National Institutes of Health, 
HHS)

    Dated: February 6, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-3599 Filed 2-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### Vicenza CARUSO-FAMIGLIETTI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HUNTINGTON UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT, Carmen Casper, John Finello, Joseph Giani, James Polansky, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 13-4341-cv.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 19, 2014.

Steven A. Morelli, The Law Offices of Steven A. Morelli, P.C., Garden City, NY, for Appellant.

Steven C. Stern (Melissa L. Holtzer, *on the brief),*Sokoloff Stern LLP, Carle Place, NY, for Appellees.

Present: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., ROSEMARY S. POOLER, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment is AFFIRMED.

Plaintiff Vicenza Caruso-Famiglietti appeals from the October 23, 2013 judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Hurley, </.), granting Defendants-Appellees’ motion to dismiss.

On appeal, Caruso-Famiglietti argues that the district court erred in dismissing her procedural due process claim.1 Specifically, she contends that Defendants-Ap-pellees violated her procedural due process rights by failing to provide an evidentiary hearing prior to excessing her. Caruso-Famiglietti grounds this claim on New York Education Law Section 2510(1), which some courts have suggested may require a predeprivation hearing when a tenured teacher’s position is abolished and a similar position is concurrently created. *See, e.g., DeSimone v. Bd. of Educ., S. Huntington Union Free Sch. Dist.*612 F.Supp. 1568 1570-71 (E.D.N.Y.1985).

Even were we to conclude that Caruso-Famiglietti was terminated and that a pre-termination hearing is required when a tenured teacher’s position is abolished and *93a similar post is concurrently created — two issues we do not reach — Caruso-Fami-glietti fails to plausibly plead that the newly created positions in this case were similar to her old position.

We have also analyzed Caruso-Famiglietti’s due process claim under the framework set forth in *Mathews v. Eldridge,*424 U.S. 319, 96 S.Ct. 893, 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976). Weighing all of the *Mathews*factors in the balance, Caruso-Famiglietti has not plausibly alleged a procedural due process violation.

We have considered Caruso-Famigliet-ti’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. For the reasons stated above, the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

1

. Caruso-Famiglietti does not challenge the dismissal of her claims alleging violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and various state and local laws.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 11, 2018

No. 04-18-00492-CV

Eric HOYELA, Jesus Oyuela, Cynthia Arredondo, Emede Barrera, 

Jose Leon Garcia Jr., Edelmira Gomez, Jorge Solis, Jorge Alberto Barrera, 

Jose Saenz, Alvaro Pena, Erika Madariaga, Gina Madariaga, Ester Madariaga,

Maria Lamar Trevino, and Monica Aguirre,

Appellants

v.

STARR COUNTY, Texas,

Appellee

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC-16-514

The Honorable Everardo Garcia, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellants have filed a motion for leave to file a motion for extension of time to file 

appellants’ brief. No motion for leave is required. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(d). We therefore 

deny the motion for leave as moot.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 11th day of October, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22

- 6894

STANLEY EARL CORBETT, JR.

,

Plaintiff

- Appellant

,

v.

JAMES HENRY CANDELARIO; CURTIS MURRAY; JAMIE EMMANUEL HOLMES; OFFICER MIZZELLE; ISLAM AYESH; OFFICER PERKINS; MR. HATLEY; OFFICER FISHER; OFFICER HALE; OFFICER GRANDY

,

Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. ( 5:19

- ct

- 0 3361

- M )

Submitted : November 22, 2022 Decided: November 29, 2022

Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Stanley Earl Corbett, Jr. , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6894 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/29/2022 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM:

Stanley Earl Corbett, Jr.

, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his

motion s for default judgment. This court may exercise jurisdiction onl y over final orders,

28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed.

R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541, 545

- 46 (1949). The

order Corbett seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or

collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before this court and argu ment would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED USCA4 Appeal: 22-6894 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/29/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000828191
<NAME> 88B
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         136,731
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  116,546
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               253,277
<PP&E>                                       7,126,358
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,063,774
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,315,861
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,896
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,288,965
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,315,861
<SALES>                                        464,466
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               468,868
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  358,604
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                110,264
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            110,264
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   110,264
<EPS-BASIC>                                      12.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1716

AN ACT

To amend the Act of January 26, 1915, establishing Rocky

Mountain National Park, to provide for the protection

of certain lands in Rocky Mountain National Park and

along North St. Vrain Creek 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. NORTH ST. VRAIN CREEK AND ADJACENT

4 LANDS.

5 The Act of January 26, 1915, establishing Rocky

6 Mountain National Park (38 Stat. 798; 16 U.S.C. 191

7 and following), is amended by adding the following new

8 section at the end thereof:
2

•HR 1716 EH

1 ‘‘SEC. 5. NORTH ST. VRAIN CREEK AND ADJACENT LANDS.

2 ‘‘Neither the Secretary of the Interior nor any other

3 Federal agency or officer may approve or issue any permit

4 for, or provide any assistance for, the construction of any

5 new dam, reservoir, or impoundment on any segment of

6 North St. Vrain Creek or its tributaries within the bound7 aries of Rocky Mountain National Park or on the main

8 stem of North St. Vrain Creek downstream to the point

9 at which the creek crosses the elevation 6,550 feet above

10 mean sea level. Nothing in this subsection shall be con11 strued to prevent the issuance of any permit for the con12 struction of a new water gaging station on North St. Vrain

13 Creek at the point of its confluence with Coulson Gulch.’’.

14 SEC. 2. ENCOURAGEMENT OF EXCHANGES.

15 (a) LANDS INSIDE ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL

16 PARK.—Promptly following enactment of this Act, the

17 Secretary of the Interior shall seek to acquire by donation

18 or exchange those lands within the boundaries of Rocky

19 Mountain National Park owned by the city of Longmont,

20 Colorado, that are referred to in section 111(d) of the Act

21 commonly referred to as the ‘‘Colorado Wilderness Act of

22 1980’’ (Public Law 96–560; 94 Stat. 3272; 16 U.S.C.

23 192b–9(d)).

24 (b) OTHER LANDS.—The Secretary of Agriculture

25 shall immediately and actively pursue negotiations with

26 the city of Longmont, Colorado, concerning the city’s pro-
3

•HR 1716 EH

1 posed exchange of lands owned by the city and located

2 in and near Coulson Gulch for other lands owned by the

3 United States. The Secretary shall report to Congress 2

4 calendar years after the date of enactment of this Act,

5 and every 2 years thereafter on the progress of such nego6 tiations until negotiations are complete.

Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 1994.

Attest:

Clerk.

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1716

AN ACT

To amend the Act of January 26, 1915, establishVrain Creek and for other purposes. Mountain National Park and along North St. for the protection of certain lands in Rocky ing Rocky Mountain National Park, to provide
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 29 (Monday, February 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 9884]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3632]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION


SUNSHINE ACT MEETING

Time and Date: 10 a.m., Thursday, February 15, 2001.

Place: Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, 
VA 22314-3428.

Status: Open.

Matters to be Considered:
    1. Request from a Federal Credit Union to Convert to a Community 
Charter.
    2. Interim Final Rule: Section 709.12, NCUA's Rules and 
Regulations, Prepayment Fees to Federal Home Loan Bank.
    3. Proposed Rule, Amendment to Part 712, NCUA's Rules and 
Regulations, Credit Union Service Organizations.
    4. Proposed Rule, Part 749, NCUA's Rules and Regulations, Vital 
Record Preservation.

Recess: 11:15 a.m.

Time and Date: 11:30 a.m., Thursday, February 15, 2001.

Place: Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, 
VA 22314-3428.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered:
    1. Special Assistance Program. Closed pursuant to exemption (8).
    2. Four (4) Personnel Matters. Closed pursuant to exemptions (2) 
and (6).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Baker, Secretary of the Board, 
Telephone 703-518-6304.

Becky Baker,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 01-3632 Filed 2-8-01; 2:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
INTIRTERY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,560
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,157
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,743
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,282
<PP&E>                                           7,033
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,838
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  61,781
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           61,237
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           147
<OTHER-SE>                                         329
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    61,781
<SALES>                                        220,114
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               220,114
<CGS>                                          208,641
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  240,591
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,774
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (21,349)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (3,104)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (18,245)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (39,759)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (58,004)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.35)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF ADVO, INC.

                            AS OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2003

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                                            PERCENT OF VOTING
STATE OF                                                                   SECURITIES OWNED AS
INCORPORATION                        NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                   OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2003
-------------        --------------------------------------------------   ---------------------
<S>                  <C>                                                  <C>
Delaware             ADVO Investment Company, Inc. ....................            100
Delaware             Value Fair, Inc. .................................            100
Delaware             MBV, Inc. ........................................            100
Delaware             Stighen, Inc. (formerly Marketing Force, Inc.)....            100(1)
Delaware             MailCoups, Inc. ..................................            100
Delaware             Coupon Distributors, Inc. ........................            100(2)
Delaware             ShopWise.com, Inc. ...............................            100
North Carolina       Netserts.com, LLC.................................            100(3)
Maryland             Mail Marketing Systems, Inc. .....................            100
Delaware             New England Direct, LLC...........................             50
Delaware             Detroit Weekend Direct............................             50
Nova Scotia, Canada  ADVO Canada, Inc. ................................            100(1)
Nova Scotia, Canada  Breezeway Communications LTD......................            100(1)
</Table>

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

(1) Owned by ADVO Investment Company, Inc.

(2) A wholly-owned subsidiary of MailCoups, Inc.

(3) A wholly-owned subsidiary of ShopWise.com. Inc.