alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.41

Kontron Embedded Computers AG
Oskar-von-Miller Strasse 1
85386 Eching





January 29, 2001


Arthur Andersen LLP
45 South Seventh Street
Minneapolis, MN  55402



Dear Sirs:

In connection with your audit of FieldWorks, Inc. for the year ended December
31, 2000, we make the following representation:


         1.       Due to the current financial condition of FieldWorks, Inc.,
                  Kontron Embedded Computers will provide FieldWorks, Inc.
                  financial support to enable FieldWorks, Inc. to meet its cash
                  flow needs and obligations as and when they fall due through
                  the period ended December 31, 2001.



                                                   /s/ Hannes Niederhauser
                                                   -----------------------

                                                   Hannes Niederhauser
                                                   President, CEO
                                                   Kontron Embedded Computers
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

THEODORE J. NEWTON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

S. EATMON, Correctional Officer, 

Defendant-Appellee, 

and 

T. VILLANUEVA, SSA, Appeals 

Coordinator, 

Defendant.

No. 19-56478 

D.C. No. 3:19-cv-00511-LABKSC 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 2, 2020**

Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Theodore J. Newton appeals pro se from the district 

* 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

DEC 10 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 19-56478 

court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies in his 

42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 

1168 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Newton 

failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and failed to raise a genuine dispute 

of material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable 

to him. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (“[P]roper exhaustion of 

administrative remedies . . . means using all steps that the agency holds out, and 

doing so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits).” (citation 

and internal quotation marks omitted)); McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-

1200 (9th Cir. 2002) (requiring inmates to exhaust administrative remedies prior to 

filing suit in federal court).

We treat the judgment as a dismissal without prejudice to Newton refiling 

the action. See McKinney, 311 F.3d at 1200-01.

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF AUGUST 21, 1999 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE TWELVE WEEKS ENDED AUGUST 21, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-03-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-21-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  211,319
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,606
<INVENTORY>                                     70,382
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               333,710
<PP&E>                                       1,342,243
<DEPRECIATION>                                 447,797
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,654,776
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          365,500
<BONDS>                                        310,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           797
<OTHER-SE>                                     627,820
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,654,776
<SALES>                                        809,473
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               809,473
<CGS>                                          380,714
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  380,714
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,769
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 53,162
<INCOME-TAX>                                    19,936
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             33,226
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    33,226
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .47


</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.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Indian Affairs 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. 

# ACTION:

notice of approved amendment to a Tribal-State Compact.

# SUMMARY:

                        Pursuant to section 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA), Pub. L. 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2710, the Secretary of the Interior shall publish in the                         **Federal Register**                        , notice of approved Tribal-State Compacts for the purpose of engaging in Class III gaming activities on Indian lands. The Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs (Management), Department of the Interior, through his delegated authority, has approved the Amendment between the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the State of South Dakota, which was executed on December 7, 2000.                     

# DATES:

This action is effective February 27, 2001. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George T. Skibine, Director, Office of Indian Gaming Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 219-4066. 

Dated: February 8, 2001.

James H. McDivitt,

Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs (Management).

[FR Doc. 01-4742 Filed 2-26-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-02-P
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2505

To extend until January 1, 1998, the existing suspension of duty on stuffed

dolls, certain toy figures, and the skins thereof.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 23, 1993

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

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To extend until January 1, 1998, the existing suspension

of duty on stuffed dolls, certain toy figures, and the

skins thereof.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF EXISTING SUSPENSION OF

4 DUTY ON STUFFED DOLLS, CERTAIN TOY FIG5 URES, AND THE SKINS THEREOF.

6 Headings 9902.95.01, 9902.95.02, and 9902.95.04

7 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

8 are each amended by striking ‘‘12/31/92’’ and inserting

9 ‘‘12/31/97’’.
2

•HR 2505 IH

1 SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by section

3 1 shall take effect on the 15th day after the date of the

4 enactment of this Act.

5 (b) RETROACTIVE PROVISION.—Notwithstanding sec6 tion 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 or any other provision

7 of law to the contrary, upon a request filed with the appro8 priate customs officer before the 180th day after the date

9 of the enactment of this Act, any entry or withdrawal from

10 warehouse for consumption of goods to which any amend11 ment made by section 1 applies and that was made—

12 (1) after December 31, 1992; and

13 (2) before the 15th day after the date of the en14 actment of this Act;

15 and with respect to which there would have been no duty

16 or a lower duty if any amendment made by section 1 had

17 applied to such entry or withdrawal, shall be liquidated

18 or reliquidated as though such entry or withdrawal had

19 occurred on such 15th day.

Æ
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

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

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,United States Code), the undersigned officer of Chase Packaging Corporation(the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2009 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Qpursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not beingfiled as part of the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated byreference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the datehereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

 

 
| August 6, 2009 | /s/ Ann C. W. Green                              |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                | Ann C. W. Green                                  |
|                | Chief Financial Officer  and Assistant Secretary |
|                | (Principal Financial and  Accounting Officer)    |

 

----
#### John RAMIREZ, as Elder of Wat Khmer Vipassanaram and president of Khmer Buddhist Association, the Spiritual Entity; et al., Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. David J. PASTERNAK; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 09-56034.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.*

Filed Jan. 7, 2011.

John Ramirez, as Elder of Wat Khmer Vipassanaram and President of Khmer Buddhist Association, The Spiritual Entity Attorney, Orange, CA, pro se.

Siphann Tith, as Elder of Wat Khmer Vipassanaram and President of Khmer Buddhist Association, Orange, CA, pro se.

Onn S. Hay, pro se.

William K. Thach, Orange, CA, pro se.

John Wesley Patton, Jr., Esquire, Pasternak, Pasternak & Patton, ALC, Scott Shabel, Law Offices of Scott Lee Shabel, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

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

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiffs appeal pro se from the district court’s orders dismissing them civil rights action and awarding Rule 11 sanctions to court-appointed receiver David J. Pasternak. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim, *New Alaska Dev. Corp. v. Guetschow,*869 F.2d 1298, 1300 (9th Cir.1989), and for abuse of discretion the award of Rule 11 sanctions, *Buster v. Greisen,*104 F.3d 1186, 1189 (9th Cir.1997). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ claims against Pasternak because the state court acted within its judicial discretion in appointing Pasternak as receiver, was not itself acting in the clear absence of all jurisdiction, and Pasternak was entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity for actions undertaken in his capacity as receiver that were “functionally comparable to those of judges.” *Curry v. Castillo (In re Castillo),*297 F.3d 940, 947 (9th Cir.2002); *see also Stump v. Sparkman,*435 U.S. 349, 356-57, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978) (“A judge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he took was in error, was done maliciously, *56or was in excess of his authority; rather, he will be subject to liability only when he has acted in the ‘clear absence of all jurisdiction.’ ”) (citation omitted); *New Alaska Dev.,*869 F.2d at 1303-04 & n. 6 (concluding that state court-appointed receiver was entitled to absolute immunity for allegedly mismanaging company assets).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding Rule 11 sanctions to Pasternak based on its conclusion that plaintiffs’ complaint was frivolous. *See Buster,*104 F.3d at 1190 (“Frivolous filings are those that are both baseless and made without a reasonable and competent inquiry.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
DISMISS and Opinion F iled September 22, 2021 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-21-00614-CV
ROCKWALL REGIONAL HOSPITAL, LLC D/B/A TEXAS HEALTH ROCKWALL, D/B/A TEXAS HEALTH PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL ROCKWALL D/B/A TEXAS HEALTH HOSPITAL ROCKWALL, Appellant V. BRILYN BAKER, Appellee
On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-13262

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Smith, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Smith Before the Court is appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal. We grant the
motion and dismiss the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).

210614F.P05 /Craig Smith / CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE–2– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT

ROCKWALL REGIONAL HOSPITAL, LLC D/B/A TEXAS HEALTH ROCKWALL, D/B/A TEXAS HEALTH PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL ROCKWALL D/B/A TEXAS HEALTH HOSPITAL ROCKWALL, Appellant

No. 05-21-00614-CV V.

BRILYN BAKER, Appellee On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-13262. Opinion delivered by Justice Smith. Justices Schenck and Garcia participating.

In accordance with this Court’s op inion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

.
It is ORDERED that appellee BRILYN BAKER recover her costs of this appeal from appellant ROCKWALL REGIONAL HOSPITAL, LLC D/B/A TEXAS HEALTH ROCKWALL D/B/A TEXAS HEALTH PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL ROCKWALL D/B/A TEXAS HE ALTH HOSPITAL ROCKWALL.

Judgment entered September 22, 2021
* 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 May 25, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-40993 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee

v. SHANE DONNTA JONES, also known as Picc Defendant - Appellant

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:02-CR-88-1

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Shane Donnta Jones was convicted pursuant to a guilty plea of conspiring to manufacture, distribute, or possess with the intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing cocaine base and/or 1000 kilograms or more of marijuana and aiding and abetting the same.
See 18 U.S.C. § 2, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846. He now appeals. Jones’s guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered in compliance with F ED . R. C RIM . P. 11. Jones has not shown that theNo. 03-40993 -2- district court erred in imposing his sentence. The district court imposed Jones’s sentence in compliance with the requirements of F ED . R. C RIM . P. 32, did not err in calculating the quantity of drugs attributable to Jones for sentencing purposes, and did not err by enhancing Jones’s offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) because Jones possessed a dangerous weapon during his offense. See United States v. Posada-Rios , 158 F.3d 832, 877-79 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. Rogers , 1 F.3d 341, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1993). Finally, Jones has not demonstrated plain error with regard to his argument, raised for the first time on appeal, that his sentence is unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000); Blakely v. Washington , 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004); and United States v. Booker , 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). The district court’s error in enhancing Jones’s sentence under the mandatory sentencing regime in effect at the time after finding facts not admitted by Jones or proven beyond reasonable doubt does not rise to the level of plain error. Nothing in the record indicates that the district court would have imposed a lesser sentence under an advisory sentencing regime rather than a mandatory one. See United States v. Infante , ___ F.3d ___, No. 02-50665, 2005 WL 639619, *13 (5th Cir. Mar. 21, 2005); United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 520-22 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed , No. 04-9517 (U.S. Mar. 31, 2005). Jones’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2826 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2826

To provide for an investigation of the whereabouts of the United States 
   citizens and others who have been missing from Cyprus since 1974.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 2, 1993

 Mr. Engel (for himself and Mr. Porter) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for an investigation of the whereabouts of the United States 
   citizens and others who have been missing from Cyprus since 1974.

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

SECTION 1. UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND OTHERS MISSING FROM CYPRUS.

    (a) Investigation.--As soon as is practicable, the President shall 
undertake, in cooperation with an appropriate international 
organization or nongovernmental organization, a thorough investigation 
of the whereabouts of the United States citizens and others who have 
been missing from Cyprus since 1974. The investigation shall focus on 
the countries and community which were combatants in Cyprus in 1974, 
all of which currently receive United States foreign assistance.
    (b) Results of the Investigation.--The President shall report the 
findings of this investigation to the family of each of the United 
States citizens and others who have been missing from Cyprus since 1974 
and to the Congress. Such reports shall include the whereabouts of the 
missing.
    (c) Returning the Missing.--The President, in cooperation with an 
appropriate international organization or nongovernmental organization, 
shall do everything possible to return to their families, as soon as is 
practicable, the United States citizens and others who have been 
missing from Cyprus since 1974, including returning the remains of 
those who are no longer alive.

                                 <all>
```
Exhibit No. 23.2


Consent of Independent Petroleum Engineers





We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-189685, No. 333-167945, No. 333-137836, No. 333-118222 and No. 333-118215) of PDC Energy, Inc. of all references to our firm and information from our reserves report dated January 26, 2015, included in or made a part of PDC Energy, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 , filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 19, 2015 , and our summary report attached as Exhibit 99.1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K.





\s\Ryder Scott Company, L.P.RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.TBPE Firm Registration No. F-1580Denver, COFebruary 19, 2015
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 17, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40933

Summary Calendar

GERALD C. PIPER, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus 

CHRISTINA M. CRAIN, Chairman, TX Board of Criminal Justice; 

DOUGLAS DRETKE, Director; RICK THALER, Regional Director; 

DAVID SWEETIN, Senior Warden; PHILLIP JEFFERIES, Lieutenant,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 9:06-CV-61

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

Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gerald C. Piper, Texas prisoner # 913394, appeals the

district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit as

frivolous and for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A. A dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which

relief may be granted is reviewed de novo. Black v. Warren, 134

F.3d 732, 734 (5th Cir. 1998). 

Piper alleges that conditions in the Eastham Unit are

interrupting his sleep. “[T]he treatment a prisoner receives in
No. 06-40933

-2-

prison and the conditions under which he is confined are subject

to scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment.” Woods v. Edwards, 51

F.3d 577, 581 (5th Cir. 1995) (internal quotations and citation

omitted). To establish an Eighth Amendment violation, the

prisoner must show that “the risk that [he] complains of [is] so

grave that it violates contemporary standards of decency to

expose anyone unwillingly to such a risk.” Helling v. McKinney,

509 U.S. 25, 36 (1993). Piper has made no showing that the

complained conditions violate contemporary standards of decency. 

The district court did not err in finding that Pipers’s claims

were insufficient to establish an Eighth Amendment violation. 

Piper is warned that the district court’s dismissal of his

§ 1983 suit counts as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g) and that if he accumulates three strikes, he will not

be able to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or

appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility

unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 

See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996);

§ 1915(g). 

AFFIRMED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.