skip navigation


Search the opinions of the US Circuit Courts of Appeal

Search for:
use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"
This collection has many hidden limitations. To find out what you're really searching, see the disclaimer .

Your query national security returned 4987 results.

Your search has returned a large number of results. You might want to consider using additional terms to narrow it.

1000 OPINION/ORDER
This civil action was brought in the District Court for the District of New Jersey by a consortium of media groups seeking access to
994 OPINION/ORDER
Because the en banc court is evenly divided. Elite failed to verify that all of its new employees were authorized to work in the United States. Zamora was a Mexican citizen who had been a permanent legal resident of the United States since 1987. Zamora also filled out an I 9 form truthfully indicating that he was a Mexican citizen and a lawful permanent resident of the United States. Elite received a tip that the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)(3) was going to investigate warehouses in the area. Elite was particularly concerned about such an investigation in light of its earlier hiring practices in June 2000. This investigation indicated that someone other than Zamora had been using the same social security number that he was using.(4) The investigation turned up similar problems with thirty five other employees' social security numbers. Tucker followed this same procedure with the other thirty five employees whose social security numbers raised concerns.(5) The memorandum Tucker gave Zamora and the other affected workers read: It is required by federal law that all employees produce documents.
984 OPINION/ORDER
Judge Berzon was drawn to replace Judge Henry A. Adopted for this litigation for reasons that will appear assert that they performed espionage activities on behalf of the United States against a former Eastern bloc country. The United States will neither confirm nor deny the Does' allegations. Their action is either appropriate only in the Court of Federal Claims or precluded by the venerable doctrine enunciated in Totten v. That the facts as alleged by the Does are true and construe the complaint in the light most favorable to their case. Are all. The Does allege that they were citizens of an Eastern bloc country formerly considered an adversary of the United States. Doe approached a person **Part II of the opinion is authored by Judge Canby. The Does recount that after this request was made. The Does further allege that the agents assured them that this assistance was approved at the highest level of authority at the CIA and was mandated by U.S. law. The Does state that although they were initially reluctant to conduct espionage activities.
964 OPINION/ORDER
936 OPINION/ORDER
I. Facts and Procedural History Ann Stehney is a mathematician. The Institute is a private think tank that conducts cryptological research the making and breaking of secret codes as a contractor for the National Security Agency. NSA must ensure that access to classified information is
928 OPINION/ORDER
Line 6 a quotation mark is added before the asterisks. The names of these individuals are classified. As is much of the information pertinent to this appeal. We have avoided reference to classified material to the greatest extent possible. We are presented with questions of grave significance questions that test the commitment of this nation to an independent judiciary. We agree with the district court that the Government's proposed substitutions for the witnesses' deposition testimony are inadequate. We reverse the district court insofar as it held that it is not possible to craft adequate substitutions. Moussaoui was arrested for an immigration violation in midAugust 2001 and. Was indicted on several charges of conspiracy related to the September 11 attacks. The Government filed a superseding indictment charging Moussaoui with six offenses: conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism tranThe name
928 OPINION/ORDER
The case compels us to revisit the use of the medical vocational guidelines in the regulations 2 promulgated under the Social Security Act to establish that there are jobs in the national economy that a claimant can perform when the claimant has both exertional and nonexertional impairments. At least one of which (left eye blindness) is a nonexertional impairment under the regulations. We will reverse the order of the District Court and remand the case with instructions to return the case to the Commissioner for further proceedings. This work was physically strenuous. During his recovery Sykes was unable to work for nine months. The final blow to Sykes's employment as a tractor trailer operator came when a bungee cord snapped as he was securing metal to his truck and ruptured the globe of his left eye. The ALJ concluded that Sykes's depression was not severe. He also concluded that Sykes was not disabled because there was other work in the national 4 economy that Sykes could perform. He argued that the ALJ erred in relying exclusively on the grids in assessing whether there were jobs in the national economy that Sykes could perform when his impairments were both exertional and nonexertional.
918 OPINION/ORDER
End page heading. >
916 OPINION/ORDER
We will affirm the orders of the district court. Is the founder and majority shareholder of two small capitalization medical services businesses EquiMed. The average market price was computed by taking the average of the stock's closing prices for the five days immediately prior to the exchange request. The structure of the second note (
911 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the brief were Mark D. Shriver III were on the brief for amicus curiae National Treasury Employees Union in support of appellees. Our limited judicial task is to determine whether the Department of Defense has acted consistently with its statutory authority in promulgating certain regulations. The primary legal question we must decide is whether the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 authorizes DoD to curtail collective bargaining rights that DoD's civilian employees otherwise possess under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. We will refer only to DoD and not also to OPM.). The
908 OPINION/ORDER
1998 4:24:29 PM
900 OPINION/ORDER
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. Because we conclude that the district court's summary judgment award and subsequent denial of the Rule 59(e) motion with regard to those costs and fees is in error. Stearns was arrested. Brady National intervened as a claimant in those proceedings in order to protect its interest in the CDs and asserted a defense of innocent ownership.2 2 The district court ruled in favor of the The civil forfeiture statute under which the CDs were seized prohibits forfeiture of property
895 99-2011 -- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. PUEBLO OF SAN JUAN -- 01/11/2002

Judge BRISCOE is filing a concurring opinion. Judge LUCERO is filing a concurring opinion by which he joins Parts I. These actions were challenged by the instant declaratory judgment and injunction suit brought by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) and Local Union No. 1385 of the Western Council of Industrial Workers (the Union) as an intervenor. The Board and the intervening Union brought this appeal from the district court's decision granting summary judgment in favor of the Pueblo.

I

The relevant facts are undisputed. San Juan Pueblo is a federally recognized Indian tribe located in New Mexico. 200 members live on tribal lands that are held in trust by the United States for the Pueblo. The Pueblo is governed by a tribal council. Which is vested with legislative authority over tribal lands. Is described in the District Court's opinion. NLRB v. The ordinance in substance is a so called

890 OPINION/ORDER
Whose name in this complaint will be Dakota Allen v. Bowman		 02 13050 / 01 01345 CV BU E 08 13 2003
In re: Will C. Cohen 03 13162 / 02 23079 CV KMM 07 08 2004
In re: Will C.
890 OPINION/ORDER
Jerome Wayne Johnson		 03 13595 / 03 00036 CR J 25 TEM 07 12 2004
In re: Will C. Bowman 02 13050 / 01 01345 CV BU E 08 13 2003
In re: Will C. Whose name in this complaint will be Dakota Allen v.
873 OPINION/ORDER
Were on the briefs. Were on the briefs. Were on the brief. Were on the brief for cross appellees Jack Lawn. Were on the brief for amici curiae International Human Rights Organizations and International Law Scholars. That Alvarez
857 OPINION/ORDER
2004 is amended as follows: 12970 CHEEMA v. Replace with
857 OPINION/ORDER
Is withdrawn and replaced by the amended opinion filed concurrently with this order. The petition for panel rehearing is denied. The vessels were arrested pursuant to maritime procedure. The district court determined that in rem jurisdiction was lost because there was no res against which to enforce an eventual in rem judgment. The district court held that it was powerless to order the Owners to reinstate the security. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The Original District Court Action Ventura Packers is a corporation that provides stevedoring services in Ventura.
855 OPINION/ORDER
We hold that the Board's denial of withholding and asylum for Rajwinder Kaur cannot be sustained because of the lack of any evidence that reasonable grounds exist to believe that she is a danger to the security of the United States. FACTS Cheema is a Sikh. He is a lawyer and a member of the Sikh Lawyers Association. He was released ten days later without charges. Cheema was arrested and questioned as to their whereabouts. When he was unable to say. He was taken into the jail yard. The next day he was again tortured on the pulley. Twenty days after his arrest he was released without charges. He was unable to walk and was hospitalized for a month. Cheema was again arrested and taken to Amritsar for interrogation. He was beaten and his right leg broken by his police interrogators. He was brought before a magistrate. Who ordered him taken to a hospital where his broken leg was set. He was discharged from custody. Charges against him were withdrawn. He was elected general secretary of this organization in 1991.
855 OPINION/ORDER
ORDER Respondent's request for clarification is GRANTED. 2004 is clarified as follows: At slip op. page 8417. ASHCROFT ing and for full relief under CAT are GRANTED. Her petition for asylum is REMANDED for the exercise of discretion. We hold that the Board's denial of withholding and asylum for Rajwinder Kaur cannot be sustained because of the lack of any evidence that reasonable grounds exist to believe that she is a danger to the security of the United States. FACTS Cheema is a Sikh. He is a lawyer and a member of the Sikh Lawyers Association. He was released ten days later without charges. Cheema was arrested and questioned as to their whereabouts. When he was unable to say. He was taken into the jail yard. The next day he was again tortured on the pulley. Twenty days after his arrest he was released without charges. He was unable to walk and was hospitalized for a month. Cheema was again arrested and taken to Amritsar for interrogation. He was beaten and his right leg broken by his police interrogators.
852 OPINION/ORDER
The vessels were arrested pursuant to maritime procedure. The district court determined that in rem jurisdiction was lost because there was no res against which to enforce an eventual in rem judgment. The district court held that it was powerless to order the Owners to reinstate the security. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The Original District Court Action Ventura Packers is a corporation that provides stevedoring services in Ventura.
852 OPINION/ORDER
We hold that the Board's denial of withholding cannot be sustained because of the lack of any evidence that reasonable grounds exist to believe the petitioners are a danger to the security of the United States. FACTS Cheema is a Sikh. He is a lawyer and a member of the Sikh Lawyers Association. He was released ten days later without charges. Cheema was arrested and questioned as to their whereabouts. When he was unable to say. He was taken into the jail yard. The next day he was again tortured on the pulley. Twenty days after his arrest he was released without charges. He was unable to walk and was hospitalized for a month. Cheema was again arrested and taken to Amritsar for interrogation. He was beaten and his right leg broken by his police interrogators. He was brought before a magistrate. Who ordered him taken to a hospital where his broken leg was set. He was discharged from custody. Charges against him were withdrawn. He was elected general secretary of this CHEEMA v. Cheema was contacted by him by telephone from Pakistan in 1996.
850 OPINION/ORDER
When Stand was approximately 18. The
850 OPINION/ORDER
This opinion limns the basis for our ruling.

840 99-2011A -- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. SAN JUAN -- 09/26/2000

2000

The court's slip opinion is corrected as follows:

  1. On page 5. The word
840 OPINION/ORDER
Was also a party to the suit both individually and as next friend to the two minor children. All of Reinbold's claims against all defendants were disposed of through pre trial motions. I. Reinbold is an employee of the NSA. Reinbold was assigned to the Naval Security Group (NAVSECGRU) at Sugar Grove. Reinbold was responsible for: (1) tasking the on site maintenance and engineering contractors. Was required to satisfy mandatory security standards and be cleared for access to sensitive compartmented information (an SCI security clearance). An SCI security clearance is only granted when
832 99-2011 -- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. PUEBLO OF SAN JUAN -- 09/26/2000

District Judge.

824 OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judges. *Michael Chertoff is substituted for his predecessor. Saravanan Kasthuri (
822 OPINION/ORDER
O:\Slip\WP\2005\04 5281 Bennett12a.odl.wpd
819 OPINION/ORDER
Who was a member of the panel. This case presents the question of whether a change in a rule governing the adjudication of social security disability benefits claims that is applied as of its effective date to all pending cases has an impermissibly retroactive effect. Have their primary effect on claimants' applications when the claimants appear before the agency to have their claims decided on the merits. The change in the rule is thus not impermissibly retroactive. When Combs' claim was administratively adjudicated. It was not impermissibly retroactive in its effect. The district court correctly concluded that the Agency's determination in this case is supported by substantial evidence. The five steps are as follows: In step one. The SSA identifies claimants who
819 OPINION/ORDER
Concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc: My colleagues have written at length regarding their views on the issue of jurisdiction under the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA). Their views are incorrect. I believe my colleagues have allowed the importance of the issues involved in the underlying merits of this appeal to cloud their judgment on the purely legal question of jurisdiction. What is now before us is an ordinary question concerning appellate jurisdiction over a discovery order. There is no question that CIPA § 7 authorizes the government to take an interlocutory appeal from an order of the district court that authorizes the disclosure of classified information to the defendant. 18 (9th Cir. 1984) (
812 RAYBURN F. HESSE V. DEPT. OF STATE

With him on the brief were David W. Of counsel was Thomas H. Hesse from his position was not procedurally flawed. His position required him to have and maintain a Top Secret security clearance. Hesse was given an opportunity to respond to the agency
812 OPINION/ORDER
They were unconstitutionally prohibited from protesting in the traditional public forums surrounding the Broadmoor Hotel (Broadmoor) in Colorado Springs. Approximately (1) NATO is the popular acronym for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Which is located across the street. The perimeter was roughly defined by five checkpoints at roadway intersections surrounding the Broadmoor property. The security zone was completely closed to all persons except conference attendees. The task force's primary security concern was the threat of a terrorist attack utilizing explosives. Broadmoor employees were bused into the zone from an off site staging area. They were pre screened by metal detectors and scanners. Several hundred members of the national and international media were allowed into the security zone. Members of the media were pre screened at an off site staging area (the World Arena) and bused into the Broadmoor. Members of the media were restricted to an area around the International Conference Center.
812 OPINION/ORDER
The bankruptcy court held that First National was eligible for subrogation under 11 U.S.C. 509(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 158(d). I. The facts of this case are undisputed. Debtor disputed First National's right to the credit card proceeds and asserted that it was entitled to the $111. An involuntary bankruptcy petition was filed against Tom Slamans. 1992 to determine who was entitled to the $111. Its interest in the credit card proceeds was superior to all other claimants. First National asserted that it was entitled to the $111. It was subrogated to Sun Company's right under the distributor agreement to setoff the credit card proceeds in its possession against the $192. [First National] is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of Sun Company.
807 OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: As is often true in the field of intellectual property. The question that we decide today is whether 35 U.S.C. § 261 of the Patent Act. Matsco Financial Corporation (Petitioners) have a security interest in a patent developed by Cybernetic Services. The patent is for a data recorder that is designed to capture data from a video signal regardless of the horizontal line in which the data is located. Petitioners' security interest in the patent was
807 OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: As is often true in the field of intellectual property. The question that we decide today is whether 35 U.S.C. § 261 of the Patent Act. Matsco Financial Corporation (Petitioners) have a security interest in a patent developed by Cybernetic Services. The patent is for a data recorder that is designed to capture data from a video signal regardless of the horizontal line in which the data is located. Petitioners' security interest in the patent was
804 OPINION/ORDER
The number of shares to be converted was controlled by a formula based on the current market value of the shares less a 17% discount for Berckeley. There is no dispute that Colkitt breached his end of the bargain. Asserts that he was justified in not complying with the Agreement because Berckeley made material misrepresentations in the Agreement 3 that violated federal securities laws and constituted common law fraud. We will affirm in part. Is the Chairman of the Board and principal shareholder of National Medical Financial Services Corporation (
804 OPINION/ORDER
802 OPINION/ORDER
This is a bankruptcy contest over unregistered copyrights between a bank that got a security interest in the 13694 IN RE: WORLD AUXILIARY POWER CO. copyrights from the owners and perfected it under state law. These simple facts are all that matters to the outcome of this case. Although the details are complex. Some of these copyrighted materials were attached to the Supplemental Type Certificates. As is common. Their copyrights were among their major assets. Aerocon was working on a venture with another company. As this litigation was pending on that date. After this transaction was completed. Buying off the trustees' and the bank's interests in the copyrights would have been a sensible. (These adversary proceedings were later consolidated.). The appeal was transferred to the district court. ANALYSIS We have jurisdiction to review the judgment of the district court13 and we review de novo.14 Copyright and bankruptcy law set the context for this litigation. The legal issue is priority of security interests.
799 OPINION/ORDER
The names of these individuals are classified. As is much of the information pertinent to this appeal. We have avoided reference to classified material to the greatest extent possible. We are presented with questions of grave significance questions that test the commitment of this nation to an independent judiciary. We agree with the district court that the Government's proposed substitutions for the witnesses' deposition testimony are inadequate. We reverse the district court insofar as it held that it is not possible to craft adequate substitutions. Moussaoui was arrested for an immigration violation in midAugust 2001 and. Was indicted on several charges of conspiracy related to the September 11 attacks. The Government filed a superceding indictment charging Moussaoui with six offenses: conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism tranThe name
794 OPINION/ORDER
United States Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Were on brief for the appellees. Was assassinated in Bogota.
786 OPINION/ORDER
Coughlin claims that the loan was secured by both his cash and Marine Bank's first priority interest in Health Management's accounts receivable. 2 No. 06 1805 that the loan was not secured by Health Management's accounts receivable. The term
786 STUDENTS AGAINST GENOCIDE V. DEPT. OF STATE

Argued the cause for appellees.
786 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were David W. Acting Assistant Attorney General at the time the brief was filed. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. 700 missing Bosnians ... might have been shot by the Bosnian Serbs
776 OPINION/ORDER
I. The National Taxpayers Union (
774 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the motion for injunction and summary reversal were Virginia A. With him on the response were Kenneth L. Hynes were on the response of amicus curiae Norfolk Southern Railway Company in support of the appellant. With him on the opposition were Robert J. With him on the opposition were Brian Boynton and James B. Act is emergency legislation. It was passed on only one reading by the D.C. Was not reviewed by the Congress and is effective for only 90 days. Act is invalid and an The D.C. Act provides that DCDOT may issue a permit for rail or motor carrier transportation otherwise banned only upon a showing that
771 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Robert A. Were on the brief for amici curiae States of Texas. Polsby were on the brief for amici curiae Professors Frederick Bieber. Stefan Bijan Tahmassebi was on the brief for amicus curiae Congress of Racial Equality. Ferrara was on the brief for amicus curiae American Civil Rights Union in support of appellants. Robert Dowlut was on the brief for amicus curiae National Rifle Association Civil Rights Defense Fund in support of appellants seeking reversal. With him on the brief were Robert J. Was on the brief for amicus curiae Ernest McGill in support of appellees. Were on the brief for amici curiae Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Were on the brief for amici curiae The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Who is a District of Columbia special police officer permitted to carry a handgun on duty as a guard at the Federal Judicial Center. Heller applied for and was denied a registration certificate to own a handgun. They are not asserting a right to carry such weapons outside their homes.
769 OPINION/ORDER
Is hereby amended as follows: 1 At Slip Op. at 7. We conclude that there is no constitutional infirmity in the statute's provisions regarding active peace officers. LOCKYER 1119 three additional constitutional claims asserted by plaintiffs on appeal is without merit. The immediate cause of the AWCA's enactment was a random shooting earlier that year at the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton. Where three hundred pupils were enjoying their morning recess. Five children aged 6 to 9 were killed. One teacher and 29 children were wounded. Was the first legislative restriction on assault weapons in the nation. Was the model for a similar federal statute enacted in 1994. So that the weapon will continue to reload and fire continuously so long as the trigger is depressed. Imposes significant restrictions on the use of weapons that are registered pursuant to its provisions. Id. § 12285(c).3 Approximately forty models of firearms are listed in the statute as subject to its restrictions. Only one bullet is fired when the user of a semi automatic weapon depresses the trigger.
769 OPINION/ORDER
Powell is substituted for his predecessor Madeline K. Are hereby withdrawn. A dissenting opinion by Judge Kleinfeld are filed simultaneously herewith. The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. POWELL 12379 The petitions for rehearing and for rehearing en banc are. Circuit Judge: Eudene Eunique was denied a passport because she was severely in arrears on her child support payments. She brought an action for declaratory and injunctive relief on the theory that the statute and regulation authorizing that denial were unconstitutional. BACKGROUND When Eunique's marriage was dissolved. Her husband was awarded custody1 of the children. She was ordered to pay child support. By 1998 she was in arrears in an amount over $20. The arrearage continued to grow.2 Despite the fact that she is unable or unwilling to pay her child support obligations. He was designated as primary caretaker. She was able to enter Mexico without a passport. 1 12380 EUNIQUE v. There is no dispute that California has adopted a procedure and that it followed the procedure in this case.
769 OPINION/ORDER
The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (
766 01-9516 -- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. OKLAHOMA FIXTURE COMPANY -- 07/09/2002

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
763 OPINION/ORDER
761 STIGILE ARTHUR W. V. CLINTON, WILLIAM J.
758 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were Linda Sher. I. When Reno Hilton began operating what was formerly a Bally's hotel restaurant casino complex in 1992. The members of which were not repre sented by any labor organization. While those charges were pending. An election was scheduled for September 1995. Was called into the office of Reno Hilton's director of security. The Burk Group official asked Parillo to help determine which security employees were pro or anti union. The Union won the election by a vote of 44 to 33 and was certified by the Board on October 12. Bennett's impression after that meeting was that Reno Hilton
758 OPINION/ORDER
Jackie Marie Hudson are Sisters in the Dominican Order. They contend that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions. Is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague. The site was in a state of high readiness the nuclear missiles were to be launched within 15 minutes of a Presidential order. Their
758 OPINION/ORDER
We conclude that there is no constitutional infirmity in the statute's provisions regarding active peace officers. We conclude that each of the three additional constitutional claims asserted by plaintiffs on appeal is without merit. The immediate cause of the AWCA's enactment was a random shooting earlier that year at the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton. Where three hundred pupils were enjoying their morning recess. Five children aged 6 to 9 were killed. One teacher and 29 children were wounded. Was the first legislative restriction on assault weapons in the nation. Was the model for a similar federal statute enacted in 1994. So that the weapon will continue to reload and fire continuously so long as the trigger is depressed. Only one bullet is fired when the user of a semi automatic weapon depresses the trigger. Another is automatically reloaded into the gun's chamber. 27 C.F.R. § 178.11 (defining semiautomatic weapons). LOCKYER restrictions on the use of weapons that are registered pursuant to its provisions.
758 RENO HILTON RESORTS V. NLRB

With him on the

brief were Linda Sher. We deny the petition for review and

grant the Board's cross application for enforcement of the

order.

I.

When Reno Hilton began operating what was formerly a

Bally's hotel restaurant casino complex in 1992. The members of which were not repre

sented by any labor organization. While those charges were pending. An election was scheduled

for September 1995. Was called into the office of Reno Hilton's director

of security. The Burk Group official asked Parillo to help

determine which security employees were pro or anti union. The hotel would

contract out the security jobs and showing Parillo figures

purporting to represent the associated cost savings.

The Union won the election by a vote of 44 to 33 and was

certified by the Board on October 12.

Bennett's impression after that meeting was that Reno Hilton

". May have lost the battle. The unit security employees] were gone.".

758 OPINION/ORDER
These eleven consolidated[fn1] actions were brought by concerned Pennsylvanians who believed that they were being charged excessive fees and interest on their credit cards and that these charges violated Pennsylvania consumer protection laws. None of the defendants are Pennsylvania lending institutions. The cases were all brought in Pennsylvania state courts and then removed by the defendants to the federal system.[fn2] These cases require that we resolve the conflict between state consumer protection law and federal banking law. We will first consider the district courts' holdings that removal jurisdiction was proper. We will reverse the district courts on this issue. The Supreme Court's conservative extension of the complete preemption doctrine and the application of the Third Circuit's two pronged test establish that federal jurisdiction is lacking in those cases in which the plaintiffs did not amend their complaints to allege federal claims. We will next consider claims particular to these actions. We will affirm the district court to the extent that the court held that plaintiffs' state law claims regarding late charges and over limit fees were substantively preempted.
756 OPINION/ORDER
The Tunica casino boat was to be constructed on site. The Biloxi boat named the
756 OPINION/ORDER
The Tunica casino boat was to be constructed on site. The Biloxi boat named the
753 OPINION/ORDER
Penn National underwrote a combined performance and payment bond for the project in the penal sum of $3.5 million.2 Retainage is
751 98-7076 -- NORTH TEXAS PRODUCTION CREDIT ASSOCIATION V. MCCURTAIN COUNTY NATIONAL BANK -- 08/15/2000

1994 loan was to enable the Clarks to purchase 1. When a financing statement is filed in McCurtain County. One copy is placed in an alphabetical index. Which is accessible to the public for purposes of conducting lien searches. One copy is placed in a numerical file located in the basement of the clerk's office. The alphabetical index copy in the public records is removed and returned to the secured party. The duplicate numerical copy in the basement is not.

NTPCA disputed MCNB's asserted priority in the remaining proceeds from the Clarks' sale of the cattle to Conley and brought the present action seeking: (1) a declaratory judgment that it held a lien superior to the lien of MCNB on certain livestock owned by the Clarks. 1995

751 O:\SCHNABEL\2006-04 CASES\COBELL V. NORTON\COBEL OPINION DRAFT 7 FORMATTED (WITH MIKE MCGRAIL'S CHANGES).WPD

With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the brief were Elliott H. Because we conclude the court's broad grant of equitable relief was an abuse of discretion. The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of the Interior are currently the designated trustee delegates for the Individual Indian Money (IIM) trust. Interior is responsible for executing most of the government's trust duties. Interior's Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is responsible for managing the lands held by the trust. That some of Interior's employees were thwarting efforts to test the security of Interior's IT systems. The district court had erroneously shifted the burden of persuasion to Interior to show why disconnection was unnecessary. As material facts were in dispute and almost nine months had passed since a previous hearing. The class members argue that Interior's arguments are foreclosed by Cobell XII. We are not bound by the later opinions. The alleged conflict is illusory. Though some degree of confusion is understandable.
751 OPINION/ORDER
Who pled guilty to importing goods into the United States that were not marked with the country of origin in violation of 18 U.S.C. Only two of the issues are of general interest and precedential value. We conclude that statements made during the factual basis portion of the plea colloquy after the plea agreement has been made are not stipulations for the purpose of section 1B1.2. We will reverse the judgment to the extent that it relied on the fraud guidelines in sentencing the defendants. 3 The second question concerns whether the president of a defense contracting company occupies a position of trust with regard to the government. Are supported by the record and are legally correct. We will therefore affirm the District Court's decision to increase Nathan's base offense level two points on this ground. We will affirm in part. Nathan was Electrodyne's president and vice president. Lander was its director of marketing. They stipulated that the applicable sentencing guideline was the smuggling guideline.
751 OPINION/ORDER
The plaintiffs are a collection of associations and individuals led by the American Civil Liberties Union. Because we cannot find that any of the plaintiffs have standing for any of their claims. Of telephone and email communications where one party to the communication is located outside the United States and the NSA has
748 OPINION/ORDER
We are asked to decide if a
743 OPINION/ORDER
The district court held that Sprague did not have a security interest in the cattle because the debtor lacked
743 OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs tell a compelling story and are not the first to tell it. Similar allegations have appeared in a separate class action. In complaints filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
743 OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs tell a compelling story and are not the first to tell it. Similar allegations have appeared in a separate class action. In complaints filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
741 OPINION/ORDER
Appellants filed lawsuits in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington seeking damages for the constitutional rights that were alleged to be violated by the emergency order. Four of the Appellants also filed individual claims in which they alleged that their constitutional rights were infringed by Seattle police officers in the course of the conference. We determine that the emergency order was a constitutional time. We also determine that there are genuine issues of material fact whether the emergency order was constitutional as applied to certain Appellants. Emily Maloney were also named plaintiffs in the lawsuit. They are not parties to this appeal. 1 5952 MENOTTI v. CITY OF SEATTLE All persons who were arrested by the City of Seattle and its police agents or its affiliated police agents on December 1 and 2. Pursuant to the defendants'
738 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief was Michael E. With him on the brief were Daniel Meron. The dispute we address today arose from one of many instances in which Churchill's call to collaboration was heeded: the construction of the United States Navy Support Facility Diego Garcia in the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). Is located in BIOT. The British have controlled these islands since 1814. Appellants Chagos Refugee Group and Chagos Social Committee are non profit associations that work to further the welfare of the Chagossians. Chagossians who traveled outside the archipelago were not allowed to return. Residents were threatened with death if they did not leave. All the cats and dogs on Diego Garcia were slaughtered. The remaining inhabitants of Diego Garcia were forced onto ships and sent to other islands in the archipelago. The entire population of the archipelago was removed two years later. Alexis claims the Chagossians were not fed during the six day sea voyage in harsh conditions. She states that her mother was pregnant at the time of the journey but miscarried the day after arriving in Seychelles.
738 OPINION/ORDER
With her on the briefs were Michael E. With him on the brief were Daniel Meron. Who at the time of the relevant events was the National Security Advisor to the President of the United States. That the CIA was to
738 OPINION/ORDER
This evidence suggested that Appellee was a member of a terrorist organization. Was involved in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and had made threats against Attorney General Janet Reno. Were not 3 substantially justified. The EAJA provides that
736 OPINION/ORDER
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Because there was no error in the ulti 4 U.S. We repeat only the facts that are relevant to the appeal. LLC and Nielsen Enterprises LLC will be referred to collectively as
730 OPINION/ORDER
Judge) remanding appellant's disability claim to the Social Security Commissioner for further proceedings. hold that the district court's order was not an abuse of discretion and therefore affirm. Butts asks us to remand only for a calculation of benefits because the Commissioner failed to sustain her burden of showing through the testimony of a vocational expert that there are jobs in the national economy that Butts could perform. The Commissioner agrees that a vocational expert was needed but argues that remand for an evidentiary hearing was within the district court's discretion. We hold that a district court's
730 ALLEGHENY LUDLUM COR V. NLRB
723 NAT'L FIRE INS. CO. OF HARTFORD V. FORTUNE CONSTR. CO. (2/7/2003, NO. 01-15124)

District Judge:

723 OPINION/ORDER
Doe asserts that § 12305 is unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Although we conclude that this case is not moot. Doe was assigned to the 2668th Transportation Company based in Sacramento. Doe was notified that he would be required to serve on active duty until March 31. Doe's unit was deployed to Fort Lewis. Was never sent to Iraq. Where he was to receive health care evaluations and treatment. Doe argued that the involuntary extension of his enlistment was contrary to constitutional and statutory DOE v. Which was denied on October 5. The government submitted a brief suggesting Doe's appeal is moot. The government represented that Doe would not be returned to active duty under § 12305 after the medical assignment is completed. We conclude Doe continues to have a personal stake in the outcome of this case sufficient to avoid dismissal on the ground of mootness. 478 (1990) (
723 OPINION/ORDER
District Judge: The primary issue presented by this appeal is whether a surety on construction contract performance and payment bonds issued on behalf of a subcontractor has superior rights to retained contract balances in the possession of the general contractor when the general contractor completed the performance and has unsatisfied claims against the defaulting subcontractor. The performance bond and payment bond documents for the Winston Park project were standard forms issued by the American Institute of Honorable Roger Vinson. Sitting by designation. 2 * Architects.1 The performance bond and payment bond documents for the West Brickell project were drafted by National Fire with language that materially differed from the Winston Park bonds. Both projects were behind schedule by this time. There was some discussion about National Fire procuring a completion contractor and about the possibility that Fortune could complete construction. The West Brickell project was near completion. Negotiations were still ongoing when.
723 OPINION/ORDER
With her on the brief were Peter D. Of counsel on the brief was Elizabeth C. Cheney did not receive the statutory procedural protections to which he was entitled before his suspension. Cheney is entitled by reason of his improper suspension. Cheney was a GS 14 criminal investigator and the Resident Agent in Charge (
723 OPINION/ORDER
We will affirm. Inc. has been manufacturing and distributing commercial electronic security control systems since 1967.1 Its devices are designed to track the physical location of goods and are sold to retailers to prevent merchandise theft. It is one of the two dominant manufacturers in the retail security products market. Which is registered with the United States Trademark office.2 1. Our recitation of the facts will be brief. Its principal and most successful products are electronic article surveillance systems designed to alert retailers when items are removed from confined areas. The systems work by placing circuited tags on merchandise which are deactivated at the time of sale. If the tags are not deactivated. Checkpoint Systems also manufactures electronic access control systems in the form of security cards that permit selected personnel to have access to restricted areas. Checkpoint Systems intends to use these electronic access control systems to make
723 OPINION/ORDER
I. Rail Link is a railroad company that provides switching operations at various manufacturing plants. Rail Link is also the parent of two wholly owned subsidiary corporations that operate
723 NAT'L FIRE INS. CO. OF HARTFORD V. FORTUNE CONSTR. CO. (2/7/2003, NO. 01-15124)

District Judge:

720 NATL ASSN REG UTIL V. SEC
718 OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction under section 10(f) of the NLRA. Because we are unable to discern the Board's Petitioner Local Joint Executive Board of Las Vegas is a committee of two local labor unions. Local 226 and Local 165 are affiliated with the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union (AFL CIO). 1 6 LOCAL JOINT EXECUTIVE BOARD v. Where the Employers are located. Is a Although section 302 of the Labor Management Relations Act (
715 OPINION/ORDER
Powell is substituted for his predecessor Madeline K. Circuit Judge: Eudene Eunique was denied a passport because she was severely in arrears on her child support payments. She brought an action for declaratory and injunctive relief on the theory that the statute and regulation authorizing that denial were unconstitutional. BACKGROUND When Eunique's marriage was dissolved. Her husband was awarded custody of the children. She was ordered to pay child support. By 1998 she was in arrears in an amount over $20. The arrearage continued to grow.1 Despite the fact that she is unable or unwilling to pay her child support obligations. She was able to enter Mexico without a passport. 2896 Eunique applied for a passport. There is no dispute that California has adopted a procedure and that it followed the procedure in this case. The Secretary of Health and Human Services received that certification and was required by law to transmit it
715 GILBERT JAMES V. NLRB
715 OPINION/ORDER
The District Court ruled that the Secretary's recommendations were invalid and the Secretary has appealed. Whether the portion of the Department of Defense report that recommends deactivation of the 111 th Fighter Wing is null and void because Governor Rendell did not consent to the deactivation. Which reads: To secure a force the units of which when combined will form complete higher tactical units. (Emphasis added) The District Court based its conclusion on the premise that the Secretary's recommendation was equivalent to a change and. We need not address the issue of justiciability because we conclude that the case is now moot. Hence we will vacate the District Court's February 7. The facts germane to our review are neither complex nor extensive. (DBCRA) Its purpose was to
715 OPINION/ORDER
Colton's primary argument on appeal is that because the government offered no evidence that he made any affirmative misrepresentations or breached any fiduciary. He cannot be held to have violated the federal bank fraud statute. So that the district court can vacate two of the bank fraud convictions because they were multiplicious. 000 and so his sentence should have been enhanced. Which was originally titled the Dennis A. He removed Ellis Koch as a trustee because Koch was known to be closely associated with him. For payment because Riggs believed that the property value was insufficient to cover the loan in light of certain environmental and financial problems jeopardizing the Wal Mart contract. Who was now practicing law in Annapolis. Laskin testified that
710 OPINION/ORDER
Did not support the Government's claim that Abdi was an escape risk. Argues that the district court was correct in applying the suppression remedy for the warrantless arrest because it violated 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2) and further. That the Government lacked probable cause to arrest him for a felony as required by the Fourth Amendment.2 Because we find that suppression is not an appropriate remedy for violation of the administrative warrant requirement of 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2). That Abdi's Fourth Amendment rights were not violated by his public warrantless arrest based on probable cause. The essential background facts are as follows. A known and now convicted member of the Al Qaeda organization who was The Government argues that it satisfied the exception to the administrative warrant requirement under 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2) because Abdi's arrest was based on probable cause and a well founded belief that Abdi presented an
705 OPINION/ORDER
We hold that (i) the meaning of
705 OPINION/ORDER
A commercial tenant at the corporate center whose offices were damaged by the fir e. Is the other appellant.1 American District T elegraph Company of Pennsylvania and ADT Security Systems. Federal jurisdiction was invoked under 28 U.S.C. Eugene Krueger was one of two general partners in Holmes and was the sole shareholder of Krueger Associates at the time of the fire. We refer to appellants as
705 OPINION/ORDER
Are as follows. Ben Hogan owned and was president of Hogan Construction Co. Hogan Construction was required to obtain a surety bond for each project. A surety bond is a tri party agreement among a principal (the contractor). The surety ensures that either the principal will satisfy the terms of the construction contract or the surety will pay the obligee for the expenses caused by the principal's failure to do so. As is the custom in the construction industry. A GAI is a personal guarantee to the bonding company that the contractor will do the job according to plans and specifications. The validity and effect of three particular GAIs are relevant to National's breach of contract cause of action against Brenda Hogan. Each of these GAIs was a generic form document with appropriate blanks for the names of the contracting parties the construction company. The first GAI named Midwest Indemnity Corporation as the indemnitee and was executed on May 16. Did not name an intended indemnitee or bonding company.4 The third GAI was executed on February 18.
703 01-9516 -- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. OKLAHOMA FIXTURE CO. -- 06/18/2003

A panel of this court held that the statutory phrase
703 OPINION/ORDER
National Park Service after Richard was injured while bodysurfing in the Virgin Islands. We have jurisdiction to review the summary judgment order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Is a question of law. 429 (3d Cir. 1991) (
703 OPINION/ORDER
National Park Service after Richard was injured while bodysurfing in the Virgin Islands. We have jurisdiction to review the summary judgment order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Is a question of law. 429 (3d Cir. 1991) (
703 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Robert B. Crotty were on the brief for amici curiae American Bankers Association and Association of Banks in Insurance. Sinder argued the cause and was on the brief for appellees. Filed suit in the district court claiming that this interpretation was incorrect as a matter of law. 12 U.S.C. s 24 (Seventh) confers the following powers upon national banks: [National banks shall have the power] [t]o exercise ... all such incidental powers as shall be necessary to carry on the business of banking. The most pertinent phrase to this case is
700 OPINION/ORDER
The district court did not have an adequate factual basis for determining whether the claimed exemptions applied to the individual documents. We will reverse the order of the district court and remand this matter for further determinations consistent with principles articulated in this opinion. I. Davin is a graduate history student at the University of Pittsburgh in the field of labor history. The Workers Alliance of America (
700 OPINION/ORDER
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (
695 OPINION/ORDER
He was induced to embark on such a course of action by the
692 OPINION/ORDER
Johnson are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Thus these PDBs are protected by FOIA exemption 3 and the National Security Act (NSA). Which was then called the President's Intelligence Checklist (PICL). The PICL's format was modified to suit his particular tastes. Was renamed the President's Daily Brief. Because the PDBs were high level intelligence documents. They were then and still are classified documents that are available only to the President and his senior advisors. 500 existing PICLs and PDBs have made their way into the public domain. Ten redacted PICLs from the Kennedy administration were released pursuant to the President John F. Two more recent PDBs were released as a part of the Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States. These PDBs were declassified after the Director of Central Intelligence determined that the public interest in disclosure outweighed the potential damage to national security that could result from disclosure.
692 98-2247 -- ATKINSON TRADING CO. INC. V. SHIRLEY -- 05/02/2000

Circuit Judge.

690 OPINION/ORDER
After these vulnerability assessments have been made. This assessment was aimed at
690 98-2073 -- FIRST SECURITY BANK V. PAN AMERICAN BANK -- 06/20/2000

She was assigned account number 033015363 and she designated the account
687 OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge William Allen complains of the determination of the Social Security Administration (
687 00-1309 -- DUANE V. U.S. DEPT. OF DEFENSE -- 01/03/2002

So that he was denied a full and fair opportunity to defend himself against those new charges at the hearing.
685 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were John L. Were on the brief. With him on the brief were Jonathan Jacob Nadler. We think the Commission's ban on integrated devices is premised on a reasonable interpretation of section 629 of the Communi cations Act. Converter boxes are the most common instrument (
685 OPINION/ORDER
685 RILEY V. MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH, INC. (6/7/2002, NO. 01-16150)

Riley and Sheila Cantrell are the trustees of the Performance Toyota. Gregory Dingle is the trustee of the Master Packaging. 15 U.S.C. § 78bb (
685 OPINION/ORDER
Insert
685 RILEY V. MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH, INC. (6/7/2002, NO. 01-16150)

Riley and Sheila Cantrell are the trustees of the Performance Toyota. Gregory Dingle is the trustee of the Master Packaging. 15 U.S.C. § 78bb (
685 OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The principal question we address here is whether state law fraud claims relating to employee stock options are preempted by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (
680 OPINION/ORDER
Crockett were indicted for multiple crimes by a federal grand jury. A jury trial commenced in which all three defendants were tried together. Crockett was found guilty of conspiracy to commit armed bank robbery. Was found not guilty of robbing two other banks with another defendant not involved in this appeal. Nos. 00 3617/3618/3741 All three defendants have appealed this verdict. Arguing that the evidence was not scientifically reliable and. Its probative value was outweighed by its prejudicial effect. Arguing that the district court committed clear error when it granted the government's peremptory challenge against an African American who could have been seated on the jury panel. Is cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Neither Rogers nor Warren are defendants in this case because they both entered into a plea agreement as part of a guilty plea to armed bank robbery. Rogers was dating Starla and he was planning on leaving for Disney World with her the next day. Rogers and Starla I This case is about a series of bank robberies that occurred in Ohio between September 1994 and November 1995.
677 OPINION/ORDER
Was with him on brief. Heenan was with her on brief. Means was on brief for intervenor Tejon Ranchcorp in support of the respondent. 2 Before: SENTELLE. Section 3(h)(1) of the Act defines the term
675 OPINION/ORDER
Because the board's decision is supported by substantial evidence and has a reasonable basis in law. Background No. 04 2329 The Union is a party to two collective bargaining agreements (
672 OPINION/ORDER
We conclude that American did not have a legal obligation to negotiate with or recognize its collectivebargaining partners upon the expiration of their respective agreements. Because we conclude that the Board's findings of unlawful discrimination against union members in violation of section 8(a)(3) and (a)(1) are supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. I. American is an Owing Mills. C.I.O. is a sprinkler fitters' union with near nationwide geographic jurisdiction. Which was accompanied by fringe benefit forms demonstrating majority union membership. Confirmed that a clear majority of the sprinkler 3 fitters in its employ have designated. Are members of. Are represented by . . . [American] therefore unconditionally acknowledges and confirms that Local 669 is the exclusive bargaining representative of its sprinkler fitter employees pursuant to Section 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act. Which was then American's bargaining representative. Which was effective from June 1. American notified both Local 669 and 536 that it was withdrawing bargaining authority from the NFSA and intended thereafter to bargain independently with the unions.
672 OPINION/ORDER
On the brief was John V. On the brief were Peter D. Of counsel on the brief was Liza M. This is a security clearance case. Jr. was removed from his position with the Department of Homeland Security (
670 SMITH V. NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMIN. BOARD SMITH V. CIRCUIT JUDGE: THIS IS AN APPEAL FROM A FINAL DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO ALL DEFENDANTS IN THIS CERTIFIED CLASS ACTION UNDER THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT INCOME SECURITY ACT. WE AFFIRM IN PART AND REVERSE IN PART. I. PLAINTIFF APPELLANT ROBERT SMITH ("SMITH") WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF DEFENDANT APPELLEE AMERICA'S FIRST CREDIT UNION ("THE CREDIT UNION") FROM JANUARY 18. AMONG WHOM ARE MEMBERS OF THE CERTIFIED PLAINTIFF CLASS. DEFENDANT APPELLEE NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION BOARD ("THE ADMINISTRATION"). THE ESSENCE OF SMITH'S COMPLAINT IS THAT THE CREDIT UNION IS LIABLE FOR RETROACTIVELY AMENDING EACH OF THESE THREE PLANS IN A MANNER THAT REDUCED THE PARTICIPANTS' ACCRUED BENEFITS IN VIOLATION OF ERISA.[2] IN ADDITION. SMITH ASSERTS THAT PRINCIPAL HAS A FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CREDIT UNION AND IS. HE WAS AN IMPROPER CLASS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE RULE OF 90 PLAN.">

This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 >
670 OPINION/ORDER
We are asked to decide whether an American Indian Tribal Court has subject matter jurisdiction over a tort case which arose out of an automobile accident which occurred between two non Indian parties on an Indian reservation. We now hold that the tribal court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the dispute. Fredericks suffered serious injuries and was hospitalized for 24 days. A 1 is a non tribal company located in Dickinson. Stockert is not a member of the tribe and resides in Dickinson. Fredericks is not a member of the tribe. She was married to a tribal member (now deceased). Her adult children are enrolled members of the tribe. A 1 was working on the reservation under a subcontract agreement with LCM Corporation. The record is not clear whether Stockert was engaged in work under the contract at the time of the accident.1 There is no proof (as opposed to allegations) that we can find in the record to support the district court's finding of fact that A 1 was in performance of the contract at the time of the accident.
670 BRANCH V. U.S.
670 OPINION/ORDER
United Security contends that the district court erred in its restitution order and that it was entitled to full compensation of its losses before any funds were returned to the other banks. Flowers was arrested with $4. One of the bills recovered was a marked bill from the West Gate Bank. Flowers was ordered to pay restitution of $15. The bank was entitled to restitution from Flowers. The bank was entitled to the money under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g).3 The district court rejected all three arguments. 849 was stolen property to be returned to all the banks. We conclude that United Security does not have standing to challenge the district court's restitution order. The plaintiff must show that it has suffered an
670 SMITH V. NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMIN. BOARD SMITH V. CIRCUIT JUDGE: THIS IS AN APPEAL FROM A FINAL DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO ALL DEFENDANTS IN THIS CERTIFIED CLASS ACTION UNDER THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT INCOME SECURITY ACT. WE AFFIRM IN PART AND REVERSE IN PART. I. PLAINTIFF APPELLANT ROBERT SMITH ("SMITH") WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF DEFENDANT APPELLEE AMERICA'S FIRST CREDIT UNION ("THE CREDIT UNION") FROM JANUARY 18. AMONG WHOM ARE MEMBERS OF THE CERTIFIED PLAINTIFF CLASS. DEFENDANT APPELLEE NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION BOARD ("THE ADMINISTRATION"). THE ESSENCE OF SMITH'S COMPLAINT IS THAT THE CREDIT UNION IS LIABLE FOR RETROACTIVELY AMENDING EACH OF THESE THREE PLANS IN A MANNER THAT REDUCED THE PARTICIPANTS' ACCRUED BENEFITS IN VIOLATION OF ERISA.[2] IN ADDITION. SMITH ASSERTS THAT PRINCIPAL HAS A FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CREDIT UNION AND IS. HE WAS AN IMPROPER CLASS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE RULE OF 90 PLAN.">

This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 >
667 OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: On page 3. That order was not issued by the Judge from whose final orders the appeal is taken.
667 CLAY V. RIVERWOOD INT'L CORP. (10/14/1998, NO. 97-8592)

(2) were not options or offers to sell stock. One alternative is the possible sale or merger of Riverwood. Co. are contacting a selective set of potential buyers and working closely with Riverwood management to evaluate this alternative.

An informal. (2) the SARs were not

667 OPINION/ORDER
With her on the brief were Peter D. With him on the brief was K. The '129 patent is directed to an underwater coupling device (the
667 OPINION/ORDER
Is the proper respondent pursuant to Fed. The Government's ability to detain an alien pursuant to § 1231(a)(6) is not unlimited. The Court further held that the statute did not authorize extended detention of an alien subject to an order of removal if it is not reasonably foreseeable that the removal will be accomplished. Petitioner Tuan Thai's post removal period detention has exceeded sixteen months despite the fact that his removal is not reasonably foreseeable. The Government contends that Thai's continued detention is nonetheless permissible because the Zadvydas ruling recognized an exception that allows for the indefinite detention of an alien under special circumstances. I. BACKGROUND Petitioner Thai is a native and citizen of Vietnam. The validity of that removal order is not at issue here. Vietnamese officials have not responded. The Government does not dispute that Thai's removal is not reasonably foreseeable at this point. The District Court noted that the Government
667 CLAY V. RIVERWOOD INT'L CORP. (10/14/1998, NO. 97-8592)

(2) were not options or offers to sell stock. One alternative is the possible sale or merger of Riverwood. Co. are contacting a selective set of potential buyers and working closely with Riverwood management to evaluate this alternative.

An informal. (2) the SARs were not

667 OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: At page 1022. First new paragraph: modify the first full sentence so that it states:
667 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were Wilma A. That the declarations in support of the FBI's invocation of FOIA's national security and law enforcement exemptions are insuffi ciently detailed to establish the absence of a genuine dispute of material fact. Ap pellant James Campbell was writing a biography about James Baldwin. Only some of which are in the appellate record. Summary judgment for the agency is not proper.
667 OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: Page 22. Byrnes & Morton were on brief for appellant Martin Quigley. Rosanna Cavallaro were on brief for appellant Richard Clark Johnson. Hamilton & Dahmen was on brief for appellant Christina Leigh Reid. Were on brief for appellee. *Of the Second Circuit. Appellants were convicted of conspiracy and substantive offenses for their roles in terrorist activities directed against the British presence in Northern Ireland. Background The facts as the jury could have found them are as follows. Was engaged in the research and development of explosives for export to the Republic of Ireland and use by the Provisional Irish Republican Army (the PIRA) in its attacks against British civilian and military targets there and elsewhere. Johnson is a highly educated and trained electrical engineer. Were issued along with those for appellants. Maguire is an Irish national who is not present in the United States. Was not present at trial. Neither is a party to this appeal. 4 him in the basement of his parents' home in Harwich.
667 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were Wilma A. That the declarations in support of the FBI's invocation of FOIA's national security and law enforcement exemptions are insuffi ciently detailed to establish the absence of a genuine dispute of material fact. Ap pellant James Campbell was writing a biography about James Baldwin. Only some of which are in the appellate record. Summary judgment for the agency is not proper.
667 03-5087 -- STILL WATER NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST CO. V. CIT GROUP/EQUIPMENT -- 09/13/2004

The term of the lease was nine months and included a purchase option.

In February 1999. This document was superseded by a second assignment executed in June 1999. Id. at 630 33. No financing statement was filed.

Pursuant to the assignment of the lease. The Subject Equipment was included in the equipment that Preussag returned to Sabre's equipment yard.

On March 8. The demand required Sabre to purchase the Subject Equipment

664 OPINION/ORDER
Hamdi is being held according to the time honored laws and customs of war. There is nothing illegal about that. The question is essentially whether the United States can capture and detain prisoners of war without subjecting the factual circumstances surrounding foreign battlefield seizures to extensive in court review.1 The answer to this is now and always has been yes. I regret that my colleague does not even quote the provisions of Article I and Article II which delegate the conduct of war to the coordinate The government does not concede that Hamdi is a prisoner of war. Rather asserts that he is an unlawful combatant. The distinction is irrelevant because the decision to detain until the cessation of hostilities belongs to the executive in either case. The panel earlier expressed doubt that the timing of a cessation of hostilities was even justiciable. Is a question too fraught with gravity even to be adequately formulated when not compelled.
664 OPINION/ORDER
The program is managed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (
662 OPINION/ORDER
The facts are taken from the well pleaded allegations of the complaint. Plaintiffs are seven Guatemalan citizens currently residing in the United States. Del Monte is a Delaware company. Its principal place of business is in Coral Gables. One hundred and four paragraph complaint is attached as an appendix to this opinion. The order upon which this appeal is based. Is an order dismissing Plaintiffs' complaint without prejudice: the district court allowed Plaintiffs a stated time in which to amend their complaint again. Plaintiffs were officers in SITRABI. Bandeuga is a wholly owned subsidiary of Del Monte. SITRABI and Bandegua were negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement for workers at the plantation. While those negotiations were ongoing. Private security forces are permitted and regulated in Guatemala. Which is described as
662 OPINION/ORDER
The Elkhorn project is a
662 OPINION/ORDER
We affirm the district court's conclusion as to preemption under the Bank Act but hold that the per diem loan interest statute is not preempted by the DIDMCA. The purpose of the audits was to ascertain whether the mortgage subsidiaries had overcharged interest and provided unduly low estimates of certain classes of settlement fees. 3 WFHMI was licensed to engage in real estate lending activities under the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act (CRMLA). Wells Fargo's claims as to WFHMI are not moot. Even if they were. There is no distinction between WFHMI and NCMC pertinent to our disposition. 4 Specifically. Unless a person or transaction is excepted from a definition or exempt from licensure by a provision of this law or a rule of the commissioner. The licensing requirements referred to in the section are discussed in more detail below. 5 The CFLL does not apply to any loans made pursuant to the CRMLA. BOUTRIS Commissioner is the state official charged with enforcing those laws governing licensed home mortgage lenders.
659 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the briefs were Elaine D. The Final Rule Fails to
657 DICKSON D. V. SECY DEF
657 OPINION/ORDER
M. Patricia Zimmerman were not entitled to the defense of judicial immunity in connection with the issuance of Vermont Notices Against Trespass broadly limiting the plaintiff's access to Vermont court property. Is a long time critic of the Vermont justice system who has sought to disseminate his message using a wide variety of means and media. Huminski complains that the restrictions are unconstitutional. One is abridgement of the rights that the First Amendment. The other is impairment of the ability of courts 1 Branzburg v. We conclude that Huminski had an individual First Amendment right of access to court proceedings even though he was not a party to and had no other official connection with them. The right created a presumption that he was entitled to access. Or proceedings and if the restrictions on his access were reasonably tailored to meet the legitimate goals of the exclusion. That this individual right was not wellsettled at the time of the events at issue here and that the defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity with respect thereto.
657 OPINION/ORDER
M. Patricia Zimmerman were not entitled to the defense of judicial immunity in connection with the issuance of Vermont Notices Against Trespass broadly limiting the plaintiff's access to Vermont court property. Is a long time critic of the Vermont justice system who has sought to disseminate his message using a wide variety of means and media. Huminski complains that the restrictions are unconstitutional. One is abridgement of the rights that the First Amendment. The other is impairment of the ability of courts 1 Branzburg v. We conclude that Huminski had an individual First Amendment right of access to court proceedings even though he was not a party to and had no other official connection with them. The right created a presumption that he was entitled to access. Or proceedings and if the restrictions on his access were reasonably tailored to meet the legitimate goals of the exclusion. That this individual right was not wellsettled at the time of the events at issue here and that the defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity with respect thereto.
657 OPINION/ORDER
M. Patricia Zimmerman were not entitled to the defense of judicial immunity in connection with the issuance of Vermont Notices Against Trespass broadly limiting the plaintiff's access to Vermont court property. Is a long time critic of the Vermont justice system who has sought to disseminate his message using a wide variety of means and media. Vermont officials therefore broadly prohibited Huminski's Huminski complains presence in and around certain state courthouses. that the restrictions are unconstitutional. One is abridgement of the rights that the First Amendment. Confers on members of the public and press to attend and report on judicial proceedings and to speak out on public issues. other is impairment of the ability of courts effectively and efficiently to protect their personnel. We conclude that Huminski had an individual First Amendment right of access to court proceedings even though he was not a party to and had no other official connection with them. The right created a We The presumption that he was entitled to access.
657 OPINION/ORDER
Senior Circuit Judge: Barbara Jean Bravender Ah Loo (
657 THE BUBBLE ROOM V. US
654 OPINION/ORDER
Who are New Jersey prison officials. The New Jersey Department of Corrections promulgated a policy in 1998 that was designed to isolate and rehabilitate gang members. The goal of this policy is to
652 OPINION/ORDER
Santiago's eight year enlistment in the Guard was due to expire on June 27. Shortly before that date his enlistment was extended by a
652 OPINION/ORDER
The Environmental Protection Agency (
649 OPINION/ORDER
P.A. were on brief for appellants.
649 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Mark L. With her on the brief were Arthur F. With him on the brief were Lynn K. Inc. is the parent company of ITT Automotive. Three of which are located in East Tawas. These are known collectively as the
649 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Scott L. With him on the briefs were George A. With him on the briefs were David W. Attorney at the time the briefs were filed. While we determine that the designation was in compliance with the statute. The Secretary of State is empowered to designate an entity as a
649 LINDER DAVID V. NATL SECURITY AGENCY
649 NATL CNCL RESISTANCE V. DOS

Representative Office.
644 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was David P. With him on the brief were Wilma A. Per haps the most serious of which was that he sometimes disappeared in foreign countries near sensitive international borders. Above
644 OPINION/ORDER
Oestreicher were on brief for appellant/cross appellee.

644 OPINION/ORDER
Which was imposed after he pled guilty to conspiracy to produce identification documents without lawful authority. I. These are the relevant facts. Valnor was indicted for conspiracy to produce identification documents without lawful authority. Except for a sentence above the statutory maximum or a sentence that
642 OPINION/ORDER
Three issues are presented for decision following the District Court's grant of summary judgment to the excess insurer. Did the District Court err in holding that New York law governs this dispute as the state in which the insurance 3 contract was issued and delivered. We conclude that although Pennsylvania's choice of law rules have abandoned the lex loci doctrine. Was unloading bags at the Pittsburgh International Airport. He was severely injured and is now a quadriplegic requiring constant round the clock care. Which was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Dyson KissnerMoran Corporation (
642 OPINION/ORDER
P. 23(f) is whether plaintiffs' securities fraud claims satisfy the requirements for class certification under Fed. We will affirm. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. P. 23 to provide for interlocutory appeal by permission of the court of appeals.1 Recognizing that denying or granting class certification is often the defining moment in class actions (for it may sound the
642 98-7063A -- HADDOCK V. APFEL -- 07/13/1999

Appellee's petition for rehearing is denied. A modified opinion is attached.

Entered for the Court

PATRICK FISHER. He is disabled unless the administrative law judge (ALJ) finds that he can do some other kind of work. The ALJ found that claimant retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) only for sedentary work that would allow him to alternate sitting and standing and that was. Which was not discussed at the hearing. Indicates that these jobs generally require greater exertional capacity than the ALJ found this claimant to have. Haddock was born on January . Haddock did not have the residual functional capacity (RFC) to return to either of his relevant past jobs

639 O:\2005-2006 TERM\03-20-06 SITTING\03-1456 AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL V. DOT\OPINION\AMERICAN_CHEMISTRYFINALV2.WPD

With him on the briefs was Nicholas J. Ackerman were on the brief for intervenors Utility Solid Waste Activities Group. On the brief were Peter D. Transporters challenge a Department of Transportation (
639 OGLESBY CARL V. US DEPT ARMY
637 OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: at slip Opinion page 6. The petition for rehearing and for rehearing en banc is denied. The district court (1) found that the Ordinances were preempted by the Home Owners' Loan Act (
637 OPINION/ORDER
Wilson was diagnosed with diabetes in the early 1990s. There were a significant number of jobs in the national economy that Wilson could perform. The ALJ determined that Wilson suffered from severe impairments on the last date he was insured specifically. There were a significant number of jobs in the national economy that Wilson could perform. The ALJ concluded that Wilson was not
637 OPINION/ORDER
We will reverse and remand because we find that the hypothetical question posed to the vocational expert by the administrative law judge did not incorporate all of Burns' limitations. He is fifty one years old and has not acquired any transferable vocational skills. Burns alleged that he was unable to work due to a heart condition.
637 98-7063 -- HADDOCK V. APFEL -- 07/13/1999

He is disabled unless the administrative law judge (ALJ) finds that he can do some other kind of work. The ALJ found that claimant retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) only for sedentary work that would allow him to alternate sitting and standing and that was. Which was not discussed at the hearing. Indicates that these jobs generally require greater exertional capacity than the ALJ found this claimant to have. Haddock was born on January . Haddock did not have the residual functional capacity (RFC) to return to either of his relevant past jobs
637 OPINION/ORDER
The district court (1) found that the Ordinances were preempted by the Home Owners' Loan Act (
637 OPINION/ORDER
The remarkable facts of this case make it indisputable that a substantial punitive damages award is warranted. Defendants' conduct was particularly egregious and a higher award to deter the casino from sanctioning such conduct in the future was appropriate. 000 will just as adequately serve the interests of punishment and deterrence and fits more comfortably in the ballpark of punitive awards that have been upheld in similar cases. Romanski then noticed there were also three female casino employees. One of these plain clothed security officers was Defendant Marlene Brown. Began to explain it was the casino's policy not to permit patrons to pick up tokens. Romanski could not have known this at the time because the casino does not post the so called policy anywhere. It is undisputed. That Romanski did not have ­ and could not have had ­ notice of the casino's purported policy on slot walking. It is undisputed that Brown and her colleagues escorted Romanski to what Defendants alternately call the
637 OPINION/ORDER
We find that there is substantial evidence to support the Board's findings and therefore enforce its orders. 2 Nos. 01 3798. Those employees are represented by ten different unions and covered by seven different collective bargaining agreements (CBAs). National Steel installed a hidden camera in a manager's file cabinet in an attempt to discover who was using the office at night when the manager was not at work. Was using the office to make long distance telephone calls. In which the Board held that the use of hidden surveillance cameras by an employer is a mandatory subject of collective bargaining. The letter also requested
637 OPINION/ORDER
Powers contends that the Commissioner's decision was not supported by substantial evidence. I. Deborah Powers was born on February 15. Was forty nine at the time of her hearing before the ALJ. Powers is also a frequent smoker who smokes ten cigarettes every day. Her claim was denied initially and on reconsideration. Which was held on November 20. She was required to lift bundles weighing upwards of fifty pounds. Which is at the center of this dispute: Q: Assume I were to find the Claimant was limited to a range of light work. She would have limitations on the utilization of her neck and upper back to the degree that she would need a job that didn't require frequent turning of the hand ­ of the head. She was talking about. Assume I were to add to the last hypothetical that the Claimant would not be able to sit or stand in total ­ any more than a total of four hours in a regular eight hour workday. He testified that there are approximately 800 such jobs in the region where the claimant lives and about 357.
637 OPINION/ORDER
Warner & Stackpole LLP were on brief for appellant. Hall & Stewart were on brief for appellees. Even if they were assumed to have occurred. Were not a material cause of Addamax's failure in the line of business at issue. We begin with a statement of those background facts that are more or less undisputed. Addamax was created by Dr. Unix is a very popular operating system for larger computers. Security software is a component that can be used with the operating system to restrict outside access to sensitive information and to restrict a particular user to information consistent with that user's security classification. While Addamax was trying to produce its security software. A different struggle was developing between AT&T the inventor of Unix and a number of major computer manufacturers. Other hardware manufacturers professed to fear that AT&T was trying to establish a single dominant version of Unix. At least one of OSF's professed objectives was to develop an alternative Unix operating system. While OSF 1 was still being developed.
634 OPINION/ORDER
LOCKYER The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. The right to keep and bear arms is in no way absolute. It is subject to reasonable restrictions such as those embedded in the statute the California legislature enacted. This case should have been reheard en banc. Dissenting from denial of rehearing en banc: Judges know very well how to read the Constitution broadly when they are sympathetic to the right being asserted. We have held. We can be equally ingenious in burying language that is incontrovertibly there. It is wrong to use some constitutional provisions as springboards for major social change while treating others like senile relatives to be cooped up in a nursing home until they quit annoying us. Expanding some to gargantuan proportions while discarding others like a crumpled gum wrapper is not faithfully applying the Constitution. The able judges of the panel majority are usually very sympathetic to individual rights. They have succumbed to the temptation to pick and choose.
634 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Richard E. On the brief were David W. Arguing that temporary retention of data for at most six months is neces sary to audit the background check system to ensure both its accuracy and privacy. If the firearm dealer is in a state that has elected to serve as a
631 03-1162 -- SOSKIN V. REINERTSON -- 01/12/2004

Circuit Judge.

629 OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The question before this Court is which of two competing security interests should be granted priority. Maryland National Bank (later NationsBank) was the first creditor to receive a security interest in the aircraft in exchange for a loan to the Debtors.1 Crestar became the second creditor to receive an interest in the aircraft on February 2. Crestar had forfeited its priority and Blair's interest was now superior to Crestar's. Crestar was not required to refile with the FAA. The sole issue before this Court is a question of law. Was Crestar required under federal and Virginia law to refile with the FAA five years after the day it filed its initial security interest to maintain the priority of its security interest? We conclude that Crestar was not required to refile and affirm the judgment of the district court. Blair argued on appeal that while the perfection of a security interest in an aircraft is governed solely by federal law. The priority of a perfected security interest is governed by state law.
629 OPINION/ORDER
Delgado is a citizen of Panama. Who was later indicted on several charges of conspiracy related to the September 11. Delgado was denied (1) On February 4. Gonzales is substituted for John Ashcroft as a Defendant Appellee in this action. (3) After examining the briefs and appellate record. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
permission to receive flight training in July 2003.(1) A second request. Was also denied. The requests were denied pursuant to section 113 of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001 (the Act).(2) The Act regulated flight training on certain aircraft. Delgado filed suit challenging the Attorney General's determination that he was not authorized to receive flight training.
629 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Paul Glist. With him on the 2 brief were Thomas O. Schwartz was on the brief for intervenor Consumer Electronics Association. The FCC declined to rescind a rule that will preclude cable operators from offering set top converter boxes that bundle both security (descrambling) and non security (e.g.
629 OPINION/ORDER
Total Myanmar was appointed Operator of the Gas Production Joint Venture and the Gas Transportation Company. Total Myanmar was responsible. For
626 OPINION/ORDER
626 INTL BRHD ELEC #99 V. NLRB
626 OPINION/ORDER
At issue is whether the Comprehensive Environmental Response. We will overrule United States v. I. The material facts are undisputed. The DuPont Newport Superfund Site is an industrial site in Delaware. The site was identified in the early 1980s as a potential threat to human health. It was placed on CERCLA's National Priorities List. The total cost to the government was $1. The District Court held the government's recovery of both
624 OPINION/ORDER
Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Beezer *Jo Anne Barnhart is substituted for her predecessor as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. P. 43(c)(2). **This disposition is published pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 36 2(g). An administrative law judge (
624 OPINION/ORDER
We will reverse. I. The underlying facts are undisputed. Were vacationing in St. The Cestonaros were confronted by two armed gun men. Daniele Cestonaro was shot and died almost immediately. The Hospital Street lot was not an official parking lot. There were no signs designating or even indicating that it was a parking lot. It was neither paved nor striped. The National Park Service was aware that crimes had occurred in the lot before December 28. The National Park Service also received regular complaints about safety in the Hospital Street lot from local business owners.1 It is undisputed that the National Park Service had done nothing to deter nighttime parking in the Hospital Street lot. The lot was lighted at night. Five lights were installed illuminating the Hospital Street lot. It is undisputed the National Park Service maintained those lights.2 1. Of the dangers in the Hospital Street lot relates more directly to the underlying negligence claims than to whether the challenged actions here were protected by the discretionary function exception.
619 OPINION/ORDER
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The defendants did not assume a duty to protect Roe and did not otherwise have a
616 OPINION/ORDER
Taylor was born in the United Kingdom in 1974 and remains a British citizen. She was adopted by citizens of the United States ­ an American serviceman and his wife ­ in the United Kingdom in 1984. The petition was approved in September 1984. Taylor was thus classified as an
616 OPINION/ORDER
Factual Overview AMI is a Delaware corporation that owns and operates hospitals and medical research facilities. It 3791 and National Union have been locked in this coverage dispute over a $5 million excess directors and officers (
616 OPINION/ORDER
Appellants claim that the Secretary's waiver was invalid and improper. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Our review of the matter is plenary. STATUTORY BACKGROUND AFDC is a joint federal and state program established under Title IV A of the Social Security Act. To needy dependent children and the parents or relatives with whom they are living . . . .
616 ELLEN MOORE V. LIBERTY NAT'L LIFE INS. CO. (9/28/2001, NO. 00-14507)

Liberty National contends that plaintiffs' claims are barred by both Alabama's applicable statute of limitations and Alabama's common law doctrine of repose. Liberty National further argues that §§ 1981 and 1982 frustrate Alabama's statutory scheme of insurance regulation and are thus reverse preempted by the McCarran Ferguson Act. We do have the jurisdiction to address those claims if we choose. The district court ruled that the § 1981 claims accrued at the time the insurance contracts were made and therefore were
616 OPINION/ORDER
Factual Overview AMI is a Delaware corporation that owns and operates hospitals and medical research facilities. It 3791 and National Union have been locked in this coverage dispute over a $5 million excess directors and officers (
616 N:\DOCS\MELISSA\06-3580 WAGNER V. ASTRUE.OPN 8.10.WPD

He was diagnosed with massive edema. Wagner was also diagnosed with nephrotic syndrome (caused by diabetic nephropathy secondary to poorly controlled diabetes). Found that Wagner's shoulder pain was non cardiac. Who stated that Wagner was
616 ELLEN MOORE V. LIBERTY NAT'L LIFE INS. CO. (9/28/2001, NO. 00-14507)

Liberty National contends that plaintiffs' claims are barred by both Alabama's applicable statute of limitations and Alabama's common law doctrine of repose. Liberty National further argues that §§ 1981 and 1982 frustrate Alabama's statutory scheme of insurance regulation and are thus reverse preempted by the McCarran Ferguson Act. We do have the jurisdiction to address those claims if we choose. The district court ruled that the § 1981 claims accrued at the time the insurance contracts were made and therefore were
616 99-9543 -- CUSTER COUNTY ACTION ASSOCIATION V. GARVEY -- 07/19/2001

Petitioners further claim implementation of the Initiative will violate their property rights under the Third and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

We exercise jurisdiction over the FAA's final order pursuant to 49 U.S.C.

616 OPINION/ORDER
Sharp & Sharp were on brief. Was on brief. Lane stated that U.S. restrictions on trade with Libya were more stringent than those of the United Kingdom. The appellant prevaricated and told them that the goods were bound for Ethiopia. Belgium (a port through which it already was scheduled to pass en route to Cyprus). Although it originally was due to depart Charlestown on October 18. The appellant vouchsafed that the computer equipment was destined for Ethiopia and signed a false SED. Neither she nor Sullivan was named as a defendant (presumably because they were beyond the court's jurisdiction). He attempted to explain away his false claim that Ethiopia was the country of ultimate destination as a standard broker's business practice designed to mask his customer's identity. His cardinal contention is that the admission of this evidence abrogated his rights under the Confrontation Clause. A. Setting the Stage The parties who agree on little else share the view that Redpath was a key witness. The motion invoked a procedural rule that provides in pertinent part: Whenever due to exceptional circumstances of the case it is in the interest of justice that the testimony of a prospective witness of a party be taken and preserved for use at trial.
614 03-1429 -- MAINSTREAM MARKETING SERVICES INC. V. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION -- 02/17/2004

The primary issue in this case is whether the First Amendment prevents the government from establishing an opt in telemarketing regulation that provides a mechanism for consumers to restrict commercial sales calls but does not provide a similar mechanism to limit charitable or political calls.
614 OPINION/ORDER
III was on brief for the appellants. Were on brief for the appellees. Who are of Irish birth and of dual Irish and American citizenship. I. The material facts are undisputed. The appellants have not pursued the claim on appeal. The Immigration Inspector position is a
611 99-9500 -- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. TRIPLE C MAINTENANCE, INC. -- 07/10/2000

Finding that Triple C is not free to attack a collective bargaining agreement on the basis of a claim of lack of majority support after more than six months had elapsed from the time the agreement was entered into and that Triple C violated
611 OPINION/ORDER
Liberty National contends that plaintiffs' claims are barred by both Alabama's applicable statute of limitations and Alabama's common law doctrine of repose. Liberty National further argues that §§ 1981 and 1982 frustrate Alabama's statutory scheme of insurance regulation and are thus reverse preempted by the McCarran Ferguson Act. We do have the jurisdiction to address those claims if we choose. The district court ruled that the § 1981 claims accrued at the time the insurance contracts were made and therefore were barred by Alabama's two year statute of limitations for personal injury torts. The court found that the proposed amended complaint alleged with particularity (as that term is defined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b)) that Liberty National fraudulently concealed the information that gave rise to plaintiffs' claims. The court held that the two year statute of limitations would be tolled under Alabama law if these specific allegations were true. 4 Liberty National argued that even if the complaint could not be dismissed at the pleadings stage on the basis of the statute of limitations.
611 OPINION/ORDER
Superior Bank argued that its mortgage was equitably subrogated to a prior recorded mortgage. After the appeal was filed in this Court. Empire National Bank's mortgage was recorded on December 17. Less than a month after the mortgage was recorded. Which was subsequently withdrawn on October 27. Superior Bank was placed in receivership pursuant to the provisions of FIRREA.1 On November 15. The bankruptcy court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the trustee and avoided Superior Bank's mortgage.2 After that judgment was affirmed by the district court on appeal. Nearly two years after the FDIC was appointed as receiver. The bankruptcy court concluded that it could not rule on Superior Bank's jurisdictional challenge because it was. A collateral attack on the judgment that was pending on appeal before this Court. 2001 order was entered by the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) and is entitled
611 OPINION/ORDER
Line 17 Amicus' name in the counsel listing is corrected to read
611 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were Jacob H. Circuit Judge: Petitioner Gerald Stoiber is an Illi nois broker associated with American Investment Services. AIS is a member of the National Association of Securities Dealers. Stoiber was sanctioned by the NASD and appealed to the Securities and Exchange Commission (
611 OPINION/ORDER
Section 365(c)(2) (11 U.S.C. §365(c)(2)) is one: a debtor may not assume
611 OPINION/ORDER
Were on brief for appellant. Dana & Gould were on brief for appellees. The result is that only the lead bank has a direct contractual relationship with the borrower.
609 OPINION/ORDER
Liberty National contends that plaintiffs' claims are barred by both Alabama's applicable statute of limitations and Alabama's common law doctrine of repose. Liberty National further argues that §§ 1981 and 1982 frustrate Alabama's statutory scheme of insurance regulation and are thus reverse preempted by the McCarranFerguson Act. We do have the jurisdiction to address those claims if we choose. The district court ruled that the § 1981 claims accrued at the time the insurance contracts were made and were therefore barred by Alabama's two year statute of limitations for personal injury torts. The court found that the proposed amended complaint alleged with particularity (as that term is defined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b)) that Liberty National fraudulently concealed the information that gave rise to plaintiffs' claims. The court held that the two year statute of 4 limitations would be tolled under Alabama law if these specific allegations were true. The court held that the state rule of repose was inapplicable to plaintiffs' federal civil rights claims.
609 OPINION/ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION This matter is before this court on an appeal from an order for summary judgment in this diversity of citizenship commercial litigation dispute. The owner/developer of the project was American Power Recyclers. The general partners were American Power Corporation (
609 OPINION/ORDER
McClure is sitting by designation from the Middle District of Pennsylvania. * 2 Joel M. That appeal is consolidated with his appeal of a final Order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entering judgment against him in a declaratory action Johnson filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 (05 4569) in an attempt to have that court declare that he is a citizen of the United States.2 1 Appellant's identity and parentage are vigorously contested. Appellant claims he is actually
606 PUBLIC CITIZEN V. DEPT. OF STATE

Tankersley argued the cause for appellant.
606 NAJJAR V. ASHCROFT (7/18/2001, NO. 99-14391)

BACKGROUND

606 OPINION/ORDER
We affirm the district court's decision that Bertram Sacks has standing to challenge the ban on travel and that the travel ban regulation was validly promulgated. To demonstrate a concrete and imminent likelihood that he will be penalized for violations of the restriction on medical donations. The twelve years of United States and United Nations sanctions were a dire time for Iraqi civilians. Sacks and other Voices members traveled to Iraq repeatedly while the sanctions were in effect. It is necessary to review the history of the Iraqi sanctions regime. Available at http://www.unicef.org/publications/index 4439.html (reviewing data on increased infant and child mortality during the sanctions regime period and concluding that
606 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Alan B. With him on the brief were Wilma A. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. The policy is unreasonable both generally and as applied to appel lant's particular request because it forces FOIA requesters to file multiple requests. Finding that the State Department has failed to substantiate its claim that an
606 OPINION/ORDER
606 00-2019 -- PAYNE V. NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY -- 10/19/2000

The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff appellant William H. He contends only that the district court should not have entered summary judgment because it denied him a jury trial to which he was entitled under the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution and Fed. It is well settled that the Seventh Amendment is not violated by proper entry of summary judgment. Ct. 2238 (2000).

Payne raises no argument on the merits to show that the district court's entry of summary judgment was improper. We will not attempt to fashion arguments for Payne.

606 NAJJAR V. ASHCROFT (7/18/2001, NO. 99-14391)

BACKGROUND

604 OPINION/ORDER
Filler were on brief. Were on brief. Klimaski were on brief for amicus curiae Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association in support of the respondent. They challenge the FAA's conclusion that it was not required to The petitioners are: Aeronautical Repair Station Association. Inc. and Minas Serop Jilizian intervened as petitioners. 1 3 conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) because the Rule does not have a significant adverse effect on small entities. 048. 3 2 The eight functions listed were: a. Which were substantially the same as those in the 1988 Rule. The FAA explained that it proposed including the italicized language
604 OPINION/ORDER
The sentence beginning
601 OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction over the district court's order. We will reverse and remand for further proceedings to determine whether Jesurum is capable of performing work or is capable of engaging in any substantial gainful activity. Is a native of the Dominican Republic with an eighth grade education and limited English language skills. She does not have a driver's license and was last employed in 1971 as a sewing machine operator. The district court concluded that the ALJ's determination was supported by substantial evidence and affirmed the Secretary's denial. Just as he accepted the ALJ's finding that Jesurum's back pains were not incapacitating and that she could perform the full range of light work. We are limited to a determination whether the Secretary's denial is supported by substantial evidence. Substantial evidence is
601 OPINION/ORDER
000.00 fund (
601 OPINION/ORDER
Boone challenges the Social Security Commissioner's determination that she is not disabled and therefore not entitled to Supplemental Security Income (
601 OPINION/ORDER
That gender was not a bona fide occupational qualification (a
601 OPINION/ORDER
000.00 fund (
598 OPINION/ORDER
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service have violated numerous environmental and conservation oriented statutes. Background Fort Baker (
598 OPINION/ORDER
1 an association of law Joining FAIR in its preliminary injunction motion and in this appeal are: the Society for Law Teachers. We hold that FAIR has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of its First Amendment claims and that it is entitled to preliminary injunctive relief. Background Facts 2 and Procedural Posture Law Schools' Nondiscrimination Policies Law schools have long maintained formal policies of nondiscrimination that withhold career placement services from employers who exclude employees and applicants based on such factors as race. The facts on appeal are not in dispute. Supp. 2d at 277. 7 2 virtually every law school now has a comprehensive policy like the following: [The] School of Law is committed to a policy of equal opportunity for all students and graduates. A servicemember is separated from the military if it is found that he or she
596 OPINION/ORDER
He asserts that he is a United States national and accordingly is not subject to the immigration laws. Also before us is Asemani's habeas petition which the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania transferred to this Court on the basis that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Asemani asserts that the petition should not have been transferred because the District Court has jurisdiction to determine citizenship in the first instance. Vacated the Immigration Judge's termination of proceedings and remanded the case for removal proceedings after finding that Asemani was not a United States national. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 to consider the order of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissing Asemani's petition for a writ of habeas corpus and will affirm. We do not have jurisdiction to consider the habeas petition transferred from the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania because Asemani failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and is not appealing a final order of removal.
596 OPINION/ORDER
We will remand to the Commissioner for further findings. I. Background Plummer is a high school graduate with an Associate's degree in business. She was twenty six years old at the time of filing. A. Medical History It is not necessary to review all of the evidence in the record pertaining to Plummer's medical impairments. The claimant was diagnosed with deQuervain's tendinitis of the left wrist in September. She was 2 Plummer v. The first mention of potential psychiatric problems in the record is an evaluation on November 26. She was diagnosed with depression. There is a medical note in her file from May 11. The next reference in the record to the claimant's mental health is a July 13. The note states Plummer is
596 OPINION/ORDER
Line 2 the word
596 OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction over this appeal from the final order of the bankruptcy court. The question on appeal is whether the Artisan has a lien which takes priority over the Lender's lien. That the Debtor's return of the equipment was not necessary for the Artisan to have a lien. The Debtor did not have the money to pay for the repairs and the Artisan refused to release the Equipment to the Debtor without payment. The Equipment was in the Artisan's possession on the Petition Date. The Artisan discovered the tractor was missing and contacted the Debtor to inquire if he had it in his possession. Agreed to return it to the Artisan as soon as he was finished using it. The tractor broke down while the Debtor was using it. The Artisan became aware that the cornhead was missing and contacted the Debtor regarding its whereabouts. Explained that he was using it to harvest corn. The bankruptcy court concluded that continuous possession is required to maintain an artisan's lien. The bankruptcy court held that even if continuous possession is not required.
593 OPINION/ORDER
Appearing at 285 F.3d 888 (9th Cir. 2002) is amended as follows: (1) Slip Opinion 5330 31: Replace paragraph beginning
593 OPINION/ORDER
Osenbrock contends that the administrative law judge's (
593 OPINION/ORDER
Osenbrock contends that the administrative law judge's (
593 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Thomas Lester. With them on the brief were Michael C. With him on the brief were Robert J. Attorney General at the 2 time the brief was filed.
593 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief was William C. With him on the brief were Frederick L. Mallison were on the brief for intervenors Shipwrights. Or conveying the impression that it is using. Although the lot is on NASSCO's property. NASSCO and the unions have a history of labor disputes. Their strategy was to put pressure on the Company while the employees remained on the job. Installation at the second was halted after the unions again complained. The microphone was never operational. The ALJ found that the videotaping at Gate 6 violated s 8(a)(1) because NASSCO had not
593 OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge This is a securities class action lawsuit brought on behalf of shareholders of the Chubb Corporation (
593 OPINION/ORDER
591 OPINION/ORDER
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > In re Sloma

United States Court of Appeals. He was employed by Gulf Coast Catering Company which provided catering services to offshore oil rigs. Damages for the injuries were governed by the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. Negotiated a settlement with Sloma to fulfill his rights under the Act pursuant to which Sloma was to be paid $180. Sloma's employer and its carrier were discharged of any further obligation or liabilities to Sloma. The settlement was approved as an Award by the United States Department of Labor. Sloma agreed that he should be paid as follows:

$500.00 per month for 20 years certain until 240 payments have been made. The loan was structured to be repaid in accordance with the annuity payments that were assigned to the Bank.

The Bank continued to receive monthly payments from Manufacturers pursuant to the assignment until Sloma's business venture failed and. Judgment was entered against Sloma for the amount due under the note.

591 OPINION/ORDER
The court will collectively refer to the appellants/cross appellees as the class. The court will collectively refer to appellees/cross appellants as Farmland. ­2­ 4 3 2 1 I. A Jurisdictional Issue We have jurisdiction over final orders and certain types of interlocutory orders. A pretrial order dismissing less than all of a plaintiff's claims is interlocutory and cannot be appealed unless it includes the grant or denial of an injunction. Or the interlocutory order is appealable under the narrow. Though the two summary judgment orders were interlocutory. At the class' request the district court both directed the entry of judgment pursuant to a Rule 54(b) determination there was no just reason for delay. Explaining that its purpose was to
591 OPINION/ORDER
He was employed by Gulf Coast Catering Company which provided catering services to offshore oil rigs. Damages for the injuries were governed by the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. Negotiated a settlement with Sloma to fulfill his rights under the Act pursuant to which Sloma was to be paid $180. Sloma's employer and its carrier were discharged of any further obligation or liabilities to Sloma. The settlement was approved as an Award by the United States Department of Labor. For which National paid Manufacturers a single premium. that he should be paid as follows: $500.00 per month for 20 years certain until 240 payments have been made. The loan was structured to be repaid in accordance with the annuity payments that were assigned to the Bank. Judgment was entered against Sloma for the amount due under the note. The Circuit Court issued a final order directing that Manufacturers fulfill the obligation under the assignment to the Bank and pay all future annuity payments until the judgment held by the Bank against Sloma was paid.
591 OPINION/ORDER
Lounsburry's application for benefits was denied initially and on reconsideration. These impairments were not disabling because they did not preclude Lounsburry from performing a single occupation that existed in significant numbers in the economy. Directs as a matter of law a determination that Lounsburry is disabled. When she was sixty two years of age. She was employed as a certified nurse's assistant from October 1985 to May 1999 and was employed as a certified home health aide from June 1998 to November 1999. Lounsburry's application for social security disability insurance was denied initially and on reconsideration. Medicalvocational testimony revealed Lounsburry to have the residual functional capacity to perform
591 OPINION/ORDER
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > In re Sloma

United States Court of Appeals. He was employed by Gulf Coast Catering Company which provided catering services to offshore oil rigs. Damages for the injuries were governed by the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. Negotiated a settlement with Sloma to fulfill his rights under the Act pursuant to which Sloma was to be paid $180. Sloma's employer and its carrier were discharged of any further obligation or liabilities to Sloma. The settlement was approved as an Award by the United States Department of Labor. Sloma agreed that he should be paid as follows:

$500.00 per month for 20 years certain until 240 payments have been made. The loan was structured to be repaid in accordance with the annuity payments that were assigned to the Bank.

The Bank continued to receive monthly payments from Manufacturers pursuant to the assignment until Sloma's business venture failed and. Judgment was entered against Sloma for the amount due under the note.

591 OPINION/ORDER
The district court certified for appeal the question of whether a declaration by a Special Advisor to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy setting forth what the government contends were the circumstances of Hamdi's capture was sufficient by itself to justify his detention. Because it is undisputed that Hamdi was captured in a zone of active combat in a foreign theater of conflict. We hold that the submitted declaration is a sufficient basis upon which to conclude that the Commander in Chief has constitutionally detained Hamdi pursuant to the war powers entrusted to him by the United States Constitution. No further factual inquiry is necessary or proper. Was foiled by the efforts of the passengers and crew on the highjacked airliner when it crashed in Somerset County. 000 people were killed on American soil that day. Have been captured by American and allied forces. Hamdi apparently was born in Louisiana but left for Saudi Arabia when he was a small child. Hamdi was transferred to the Norfolk Naval Station Brig after it was discovered that he may not have renounced his American citizenship.
591 OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: on slip opinion page 11744. Lounsburry's application for benefits was denied initially and on reconsideration. These impairments were not disabling because they did not preclude Lounsburry from performing a single occupation that existed in significant numbers in the economy. Directs as a matter of law a determination that Lounsburry is disabled. When she was sixty two years of age. She was employed as a certified nurse's assistant from October 1985 to May 1999 and was employed as a certified home health aide from June 1998 to November 1999. Lounsburry's application for social security disability insurance was denied initially and on reconsideration. Medicalvocational testimony revealed Lounsburry to have the residual functional capacity to perform
588 OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief was James Caffentzis. With him on the brief were Peter D. Of counsel was Maria Pagan. McDermott Will & Emery LLP. With him on the brief was Raymond Paretzky. Of counsel was David J. Motions Systems was one of three domestic producers of pedestal actuators. The ITC promptly investigated
588 OPINION/ORDER
O:\Slip\WP\2005\04 1433 NTEU8aa.odl.wpd
588 OPINION/ORDER
Also paid out claims to tens of thousands of individuals whose structures were insured under FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program. After questions were raised concerning how 2 individual disaster assistance was disbursed in one Florida county following one of the hurricanes. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that disclosure of both the names and the addresses was exempt under Exemption 6. At issue today is whether FEMA has established that the names and addresses of 1.3 million individuals who applied for aid or made insurance claims after one of 31 federally declared disasters are exempt from disclosure under the FOIA. We conclude that the addresses are not exempt under Exemption 6 because FEMA has failed to meet its heavy burden of showing a 3
588 OPINION/ORDER
Burnett maintains her back and knee injuries have rendered her totally unable to work since May 18. A. Medical History Burnett was first seen for her knee injury in January. Burnett was seen by Dr. Mittman concluded Burnett did not have a significant problem with her knee and that she could return to work. He was not authorized to deal with Burnett's back problems. 3 In April 1992. Concluded it was probably a benign bone tumor. He concluded Burnett was
588 OPINION/ORDER
Sitting by designation. claims and was dismissed from the case. Although Doe settled his claim and was dismissed from Roe's Br. at 1 n.2. This action was the case. Doe is no longer a party to this action. This case remains a We will therefore In 1989. United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota. 2 Insurance on property I [Roe] give as security is required. If insurance is required. I promise to keep the property insured throughout the term of my loan and to deliver a certificate of insurance to you that shows I have purchased insurance of this kind. ... I will immediately repay you for any amounts you spend in purchasing that insurance. In force during the term of the loan and will furnish Norwest . . . with a loss payable endorsement upon each renewal of said insurance. Which indicated that only Norwest's interest in the vehicle was insured. The same process was repeated. Which is otherwise similar to ordinary comprehensive and collision coverage. Is limited to either the damage to the collateral or the balance of the customer's loan.
588 OPINION/ORDER
(3) by

electing to stay in the United States and to seek asylum

after being told by the FBI that he was in

588 OPINION/ORDER
Because we find that the NLRB did not abuse its discretion and the underlying decision of the regional office was supported by substantial evidence. We will grant the NLRB's petition for enforcement and deny Guardian's petition for review. The business of the armored car division is conducted out of three branch offices. Which have approximately 60 employees each. The three branch offices are strategically located to serve Guardian's customers in Michigan and northwest Ohio. Highland Park and Mount Morris are approximately 75 miles apart. Highland Park and Comstock Park are approximately 190 miles apart. Morris are approximately 100 miles apart. Both officers are in regular contact with all divisions and branches. Hugh Adams (
586 OPINION/ORDER
Claimant's impairments are severe and prevent her from performing her past work as a cook. BACKGROUND Claimant was born in 1944 and has a ninth grade education. Claimant was granted disability benefits by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Retirement Systems Administration. The ALJ concluded that claimant was not entitled to disability benefits. The ALJ modified his original findings and concluded that claimant's RFC
586 UNITED STATES V. SCHLEI

This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > United States v. Senior Circuit Judge:<p> <p> Barbara Jean Bravender Ah Loo ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="586"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/85E12F7AAC2A420688256FB70000CDB6/$file/0315695.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We further conclude that NASD rules approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission have preemptive force over conflicting state law. Section 6 of the California Constitution requires the [California Judicial Council] to improve the administration of justice by . . . [a]dopting rules for court administration and rules of practice and procedure that are not inconsistent with statute . . . . </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="586"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/08/99-1166.htm">99-1166 -- U.S. V. SICKEN -- 08/15/2000<BR></A><BR> 1291. <p align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="586"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1642.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Davis and McGovern & Associates were on brief for appellant. Crisafulli were on brief for appellees Fleet National Bank and Fleet Credit Corp. With whom McGair & McGair was on brief for appellees C & J Jewelry Co. The facts are related in the light most favorable to appellant Peters. At 6 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="586"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept97/95-3004.opa.html">UNITED STATES V. SCHLEI<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. Senior Circuit Judge:<p> <p> Barbara Jean Bravender Ah Loo ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="586"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/02/052306P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> John's is a not for profit corporation operated by the Sisters of Mercy. Its principal offices and place of business are in St. The RNs have been represented by the United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 655. At issue in this case is a CBA entered into by St. Whichever is later. Upon written This agreement was in effect at the time the complaint was filed. The new CBA is effective from October 23. The new CBA does not contain a union security provision. 21 notice from the Union to such effect and to the further effect that Union membership was available to such RN on the same terms and conditions generally available to other members. To discharge such RN within ten (10) working days following the receipt of such notice.2 These clauses have led to a number of disputes between St. Except in those states that have enacted </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="583"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1645p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> (3) by electing to stay in the United States and to seek asylum after being told by the FBI that he was in </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="583"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199903/97-5199a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the brief were Wilma A. Who claims to have been employed by the Central Intelligence Agency. The district court granted summary judgment for the agency on the ground that its response was justified under Exemptions 1 and 3 to the FOIA. Because his records were in the custody of the CIA. In formed him that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="581"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200302/02-5234a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="581"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/05/96-2194.htm">96-2194 -- RASCON V. U.S. WEST COMMUNICATIONS INC. -- 05/06/1998<BR></A><BR> Rascon was participating in the program. He tried to explain to her what it was and why he was seeking this type of treatment. She did not know what posttraumatic disorder was. That a four month duration was likely. Sullivan to find out what information was needed. <p> On January 14. Rascon that U S West did not have enough information to grant a paid disability leave but that U S West would grant unpaid departmental leaves of absence. He reminded her that the estimated duration was four months. The best way to ensure that this process occurs smoothly is to complete a release and waiver before absence occurs. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="581"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/08/953201P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. Roe was born on November 14. Iowa. school until eighth grade when he was expelled. The ALJ determines the nature of If the claimant Roe's past relevant work and evaluates whether Roe is capable of performing this work in light of his residual functional capacity. he is not considered to be is found to be sufficiently able to perform any of his past relevant work. A claimant is not disabled if (1) he is working and the work qualifies as substantial gainful activity. Or (2) he does not have an impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits his ability to do basic work activities. A claimant is not disabled if (3) he does not have an impairment which is presumptively considered to be disabling. That while Roe was currently working on a relatively regular basis. He was not engaged in substantial gainful activity due to the variability of his income. The ALJ found that Roe was capable of performing past relevant work and. The ALJ also considered Roe's residual functional capacity which is defined as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="581"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=07-7010.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Astrue is substituted for JoAnne B. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent. I. Plaintiff was born on August 29. After plaintiff's applications for benefits were denied initially and on reconsideration. A de novo hearing was held before an administrative law judge (ALJ) in May 2004. The ALJ went through the five step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. The ALJ made several findings that are germane to the issues raised by plaintiff in this appeal. Skin problems that cause[] significant vocationally relevant limitations and are considered `severe' impairments. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="581"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/June2004/033313p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That the Commissioner's ensuing decision is. Early Procedural History Ramirez is a 47 year old divorced mother of two children with no significant work experience. Claiming that she was disabled by asthma. Finding that Ramirez was not disabled by her physical or mental impairments. Which is meant to assess a claimant's ability to perform either the claimant's previous work or other work in the national economy. Ramirez's mental functioning was also in 1998 assessed by Dr. That there was no need to limit Ramirez's interaction with the public or with coworkers. The ALJ posed the following hypothetical question to vocational expert Julie Stratton: I will begin by asking you to assume that we're talking about an individual of Ms. . . . are there jobs in the regional or national economy that the individual could perform? It is significant that neither Dr. The purpose of the hypothetical was to assess Ramirez's residual functional capacity. There were several jobs in the local and national economy that the hypothetical claimant could perform. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="581"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/08/002289P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. 2 2 the agency agreement and was negligent in its handling of three real estate transactions. What damages were sustained by National. Summary judgment is appropriate only when there is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="581"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTI2NzgtY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-2678-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who is awaiting sentencing in the Western District of New York (Richard J. The Crime of Conviction Mohammed Abuhamra is a native of Yemen who has been a resident of the United States since 1975 and a citizen of this country since 1981. Until his remand on the order that 2 is the subject of this appeal. Abuhamra was arrested and charged with participating. Abuhamra was found guilty on three counts of unlawfully dealing in contraband cigarettes in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2342(a). Four codefendants were simultaneously found guilty on the same or related charges. Abuhamra was permitted to make a pilgrimage to Mecca. He was permitted to travel to Yemen for more than three months to visit his dying father. The government advised the district court that the facility where Abuhamra's father was reportedly hospitalized was non existent. Defense counsel was apparently able to demonstrate that 3 the government was mistaken. Which states in pertinent part: [T]he judicial officer shall order that a person who has been found guilty of an offense and who is awaiting imposition or execution of sentence. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="581"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/May2002/004318.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> American Depositary Receipts ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="578"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/707d3dac3bc60f2488256be90052086f/$FILE/0015058.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ORDER The petition for panel rehearing is granted. Are withdrawn. The opinions filed concurrently with this order are substituted in their place. Where they are examined by metal detectors and their possessions are x rayed. Both ticketed passengers and the general public were allowed to enter the secured area. Globe argued that Dazo's state law claims were preempted by the Warsaw Convention. Holding that the theft occurred while Dazo was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="578"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200117176.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were convicted and sentenced for The Honorable James L. Hernandez was also convicted of conspiracy to commit murder by supporting and implementing a plan to shoot down United States civilian aircraft outside of Cuban and United States airspace. That the pervasive community prejudice against Fidel Castro and the Cuban government and its agents and the publicity surrounding the trial and other community events combined to create a situation where they were unable to obtain a fair and impartial trial.1 We agree. Medina contend that the evidence was insufficient on the counts relating to violations of the Foreign Services Registration Act. Our review of the evidence at trial is more extensive than is typical for consideration of an appeal involving the denial of a motion for change of venue. This is so because the trial evidence itself created safety concerns for the jury which implicate venue considerations. Medina were arrested on a criminal complaint on 12 September 1998. Were subsequently indicted with nine codefendants for conspiring to act as agents of the Republic of Cuba without registering with the Attorney General of the United States and to defraud the United States. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="578"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-5108.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the brief was Kathy Bailey. With her on the brief were Thomas L. Of counsel was Susan V. With her on the brief was Roger J. Did not have a cognizable property interest </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="578"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A3AC4A8F164DA30288256BBA0080B31D/$file/9935320.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> FACE gives aggrieved persons a right of action against whoever by </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="578"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0F569EF00290007188256BC0005876E6/$file/9935320ebcorrected.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop\temp21\PlannedParenthoodLetter1.wpd
578 OPINION/ORDER
We are satisfied that. Is entitled to recover both the collateral (an aircraft engine) and the proceeds. This conclusion is also supported: (1) by the language of the controlling agreements between Tower and FINOVA. We will therefore affirm the order of the District Court. The agreements specified that insurance proceeds of the engines were part of FINOVA's collateral.1 Tower also covenanted to maintain insurance on the aircraft. The engine at issue in this appeal was severely damaged in an in flight accident. The cross collateralization was created in page 2 of the Aircraft Mortgage. As 49 U.S.C. § 44107 is such a statute. Its UCC filings in New York were unnecessary. 503.26 was directly attributable to the accident. Was appointed Chapter 7 trustee. The engine was returned to FINOVA. Some of FINOVA's other collateral was apparently destroyed or impaired by Tower. There is no dispute that the engine was returned in fully repaired condition. FINOVA contends that the total value of all returned collateral was some $36 million.
578 OPINION/ORDER
ORDER The petition for panel rehearing is granted. Are withdrawn. The opinions filed concurrently with this order are substituted in their place. Where they are examined by metal detectors and their possessions are x rayed. Both ticketed passengers and the general public were allowed to enter the secured area. Globe argued that Dazo's state law claims were preempted by the Warsaw Convention. Holding that the theft occurred while Dazo was
578 ASSN BITUMINOUS INC V. APFEL KENNETH S.

Steyer and Mary Lou Smith were on the

briefs.

Sushma Soni. United States Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Were on the brief.

Peter Buscemi argued the cause for appellees United Mine

Workers of America. Mooney were on the brief.

Before: Silberman. Circuit Judge: Appellant Association of Bitumi

nous Contractors contends that because its members are not

in the

576 OPINION/ORDER
Were on brief. Dwyer & Collora were on brief. We affirm the district court's finding that the law interferes with the foreign affairs power of the federal government and is thus unconstitutional. We further find that the Massachusetts Burma Law violates the Supremacy Clause because it is preempted by federal sanctions against Burma. There is one matter on which the parties are agreed: human rights conditions in Burma are deplorable. Final determination as to whether a company is in fact
576 PATRICK J. GRIFFIN V. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Argued for respondent.
571 OPINION/ORDER
The bankruptcy court found that the payments were not avoidable transfers under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b). We agree with the bankruptcy court and the district court that the trustee did not satisfy his burden of showing that TCFC received a greater amount by virtue of the payments than it would have received in a hypothetical chapter 7 liquidation. TCFC was one of Smith's primary lenders for almost a decade. TCFC's loans were secured by a first priority floating lien on the prime inventory and the proceeds from it.1 Thus. That lien was junior to the prime collateral liens of Smith's other secured creditors. 13137 Smith's. The Bank advanced new funds to Smith's if sufficient collateral was available. The case was converted to a chapter 2 Because of these procedures. Which we will describe below. Were not made directly from the proceeds of the sales of TCFC's collateral. 13138 7 liquidation and Batlan was appointed as trustee. Believing that the payments were preferential. That the trustee had failed to meet his burden of proof in showing that the payments were preferential transfers.
571 OPINION/ORDER
The bankruptcy court found that the payments were not avoidable transfers under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b). We agree with the bankruptcy court and the district court that the trustee did not satisfy his burden of showing that TCFC received a greater amount by virtue of the payments than it would have received in a hypothetical chapter 7 liquidation. TCFC was one of Smith's primary lenders for almost a decade. TCFC's loans were secured by a first priority floating lien on the prime inventory and the proceeds from it.1 Thus. That lien was junior to the prime collateral liens of Smith's other secured creditors. 13137 Smith's. The Bank advanced new funds to Smith's if sufficient collateral was available. The case was converted to a chapter 2 Because of these procedures. Which we will describe below. Were not made directly from the proceeds of the sales of TCFC's collateral. 13138 7 liquidation and Batlan was appointed as trustee. Believing that the payments were preferential. That the trustee had failed to meet his burden of proof in showing that the payments were preferential transfers.
571 OPINION/ORDER
Steyer and Mary Lou Smith were on the briefs. United States Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Were on the brief. Mooney were on the brief. Circuit Judge: Appellant Association of Bitumi nous Contractors contends that because its members are not in the
568 AL NAJJAR V. ASHCROFT (11/28/2001, NO. 00-14947)

The government's appeal of his separate bond case is therefore moot. The first action is the government's effort to remove Al Najjar from the United States due to the expiration of his status as a legal alien. Which is the subject of this appeal. Is Al Najjar's bid to be released from detention on bond during the pendency of his deportation proceedings. It is the recent and final completion of the first action that renders the instant case unambiguously moot.

568 OPINION/ORDER
III 1997) which provides:
568 OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: On page 9. Replace
568 OPINION/ORDER
Bloom was hired as a clerical worker with Group Health. A few months after Bloom was hired. The union sent Bloom the following letter: Our office has been informed that you are now working for Group Health. We have never received an Application for Membership or a Voluntary Dues Checkoff Card from you. He requested an itemization of how union dues were spent and reimbursement for the dues that had already been withheld. It is a part of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between Office and Professional Employees International Union. Inc. that you must become a member of the Union thirty one days after you are hired. I shall have no alternative but to request GHI that your employment be terminated. It is my sincere hope that you will choose to join Local 12 and return the cards to this office as we have requested. The parties' stipulation of facts and motion to transfer the proceedings to the Board were approved. While the case was pending. Bloom's complaint was then summarily dismissed. We concluded
568 AL NAJJAR V. ASHCROFT (11/28/2001, NO. 00-14947)

The government's appeal of his separate bond case is therefore moot. The first action is the government's effort to remove Al Najjar from the United States due to the expiration of his status as a legal alien. Which is the subject of this appeal. Is Al Najjar's bid to be released from detention on bond during the pendency of his deportation proceedings. It is the recent and final completion of the first action that renders the instant case unambiguously moot.

568 OPINION/ORDER
Because Figueroa's specific objections on appeal are meritless. Because our review of the record shows that substantial evidence supports the finding that Figueroa was not disabled. The ALJ found that Figueroa's back condition was compatible with episodic pain. There are significant gaps in Figueroa's medical records between December 1988. We have found no medical records indicating that Figueroa complained of pain to examining physicians for the periods 3 from May 1989 to December 1989. The ALJ took account of that testimony and stated that Figueroa's
568 OPINION/ORDER
We have minimized the use of acronyms. Native Ecosystems included another document that was not part of the administrative record in its original Excerpts of Record (
568 OPINION/ORDER
Was terminated on April 9. She was
568 OPINION/ORDER
At issue is whether this action on behalf of a putative class of Salomon Smith Barney retail brokerage customers is preempted by SLUSA. We will affirm. I. Salomon Smith Barney is one of the world's largest stock brokerage and investment banking firms. Among its customers are corporate clients who receive investment banking services such as equity and debt underwriting. This action alleges that Salomon Smith Barney's research was unlawfully biased in favor of the firm's investment banking clients. The gravamen of the action is the allegedly
568 OPINION/ORDER
We find that critical findings of the hearings officer were not supported by substantial evidence and that the hypothetical question posed to the vocational expert by the hearings officer did not incorporate all of Robinson's limitations. We will reverse and remand with instructions that an order granting a period of disability and early Medicare coverage be entered. Thereafter he applied for and was awarded an occupational disability annuity under section 2(a)(1)(iv) of the Railroad Retirement Act. Had completed twenty years of service and was found unable to perform his regular railroad occupation. His application for an occupational disability annuity was also an application for a period of disability and early Medicare coverage under the Social Security Act. This application was denied on March 12. His application was denied at the various administrative stages. A telephone hearing was held at which a vocational expert testified in response to hypothetical questions which the hearings officer posed and in response to questions which Robinson's attorney posed.
565 OPINION/ORDER
All of which are connected to his support of Hizballah. The appeal was argued before a three judge panel. I. Facts The facts underlying Hammoud's convictions and sentence are largely undisputed. A. Hizballah Hizballah is an organization founded by Lebanese Shi'a Muslims in response to the 1982 invasion of Lebanon by Israel. It is also a strong opponent of Western presence in the Middle East. Hizballah is particularly opposed to the existence of Israel and to the activities of the American government in the Middle East. Hizballah's general secretary is Hassan Nasserallah. Its spiritual leader is Sheikh Fadlallah. While the asylum application was pending. Where his brothers and cousins were living. While the North Carolina tax is only 50˘. It is estimated that the conspiracy involved a quantity of cigarettes valued at roughly $7.5 million and that the state of Michigan was deprived of $3 million in tax revenues. These services were often conducted at Hammoud's home. Hammoud who is acquainted with both Nasserallah and Fadlallah.
565 OPINION/ORDER
Henderson argues that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred in failing to adequately follow adjudicative guidance in Social Security Ruling (SSR) 83 12 when reaching his determination that Henderson was not eligible for benefits. We will affirm the District Court's judgment. I. Henderson was born on May 29. Among the results of these impairments is an apparent inability to sit or stand for an extended period of time. Henderson's application for disability insurance benefits was denied both initially and upon reconsideration. He was capable of performing a significant number of jobs in the national economy. The terms Vocational Expert (VE) and Vocational Specialist (VS) are used interchangeably. 1 nationally. The role of this Court is identical to that of the District Court. We must determine whether there is substantial evidence to support the Commissioner's decision.
565 OPINION/ORDER
563 OPINION/ORDER
Van Diest was included as a defen 2 No. 01 2250 dant because the scope of Van Diest's security interest in Henning's assets affects the extent of the Bank's security interest. Finding that Van Diest's security interest was limited to the inventory it sold to Hennings (as opposed to the whole of Hennings's inventory). Other claims that were at issue in those proceedings are not relevant to this appeal. Was in the business of selling agricultural chemicals and products. As is customary. The Bank is among Hennings's creditors. These agreements were covered by the Uniform Commercial Code. The language of which is at the core of this dispute. The Security Agreement was based on a preprinted standard
563 GIBSON V. RESOLUTION TRUST

This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Gibson v. Properly repudiated a contract in which CenTrust was a party. We determine that summary judgment was appropriately granted. The RTC was appointed conservator of CenTrust. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4CB220513C76DEEF882571A9007D3CA7/$file/0473295.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Zehatye's Arrival in the United States Zehatye is a native and citizen of Eritrea. Explaining that she was a Jehovah's Witness and feared being </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may95/91-5035.opa.html">GIBSON V. RESOLUTION TRUST<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Gibson v. Properly repudiated a contract in which CenTrust was a party. We determine that summary judgment was appropriately granted. The RTC was appointed conservator of CenTrust. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2000/995355q.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Class's complaint was filed under S 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200504/04-1157a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> On the briefs were Gregory O'Duden. With him on the brief were David M. Wherein the Authority held that the United States Customs Service ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jun2000/995355.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Class's complaint was filed under S 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=97-8022.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for Philip Morris appellants. Were on brief for United States Tobacco Company appellants. Were on brief for appellees. The specific plaintiffs appellants are Philip Morris Incorporated. The specific defendants appellees are L. We consider the statutes' respective texts along with the relevant historical and legislative contexts in which they were enacted. Normally we consider the record evidence with respect to each motion separately </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1559.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Potash were on brief for appellant. Blankstein & Lund were on brief for appellee. Two principal issues are raised on appeal: first. Whether a nonclient can maintain an action against an attorney when that attorney negligently certifies to a mortgagee that the title is good. Milford was represented in the 1988 transaction by appellee Antonellis. The mortgagee [held] a good and sufficient record first mortgage to the property. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/45541e10f4a11dac88256e5a00707b21/$FILE/0010149.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Hawkins appeals from the district court's order affirming the magistrate judge's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained as the result of the warrantless stop of his truck as he was about to leave McClellan Air Force Base ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1212.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C. were on brief for appellant. Hoag & Eliot were on brief for appellees. Is now brought to bear on a transaction that Congress probably did not consider. We are left to make a judgment based on clues garnered from statutory language. Both Contel and its merger subsidiary were Delaware corporations. NDS was a Massachusetts corporation. NDS stock was publicly traded. 15 U.S.C. 77e 77p. 2 2 The merger was approved by NDS stockholders. NDS was merged into the Contel subsidiary on July 16. Was brought against the accounting firm of Coopers & Lybrand. So the focus of the dispute is upon the term </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-3413.html">CAROL BRILEY V. NATIONAL ARCHIVES<BR></A><BR> On the brief were <u>David W. Of counsel on the brief was <u>Amy E. <u>Circuit Judge</u>.</p> <p ALIGN= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/443a0db2ecc5d4a188256a45005d38da/$FILE/0010149.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Hawkins appeals from the district court's order affirming the magistrate judge's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained as the result of the warrantless stop of his truck as he was about to leave McClellan Air Force Base ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001507.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> While he was stationed at a Marine base in Tustin. Except for a one year military leave of absence when he was stationed abroad. She responded that they would be glad to have him in the North Carolina store and to get in touch with the store when he arrived. Mansfield again indicated that there were no openings. Santana returned to the store twice in February but was unable to see either Mansfield or operations manager Katsekes. He was unable to speak with either of them. Which were submitted as exhibits in opposition to Sears's motion for summary judgment.). Haynes commented on Santana's accent and asked where he was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-1346_024.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Advocate South Suburban Hospital was charged with unlawfully threatening one of its nurses for her participation in the Service Employees International Union's campaign to organize Advocate 2 Nos. 06 1346 & 06 1511 employees. The National Labor Relations Board concluded that one of Advocate's managers coercively interrogated and threatened the nurse and implied that the union was under surveillance. Service Employees International Union (SEIU) was campaigning to unionize some of them. One employee receptive to SEIU's campaign was Susan Hall. Hall claims that when Advocate discovered her attendance at SEIU meetings and she appeared in SEIU literature she was threatened by her supervisor Beverly Mulvihill. (The precise date is unknown. Hall could Nos. 06 1346 & 06 1511 3 roughly describe when events occurred in relation to each other but was mostly unable to give precise dates.). Early August 2004 </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/45541E10F4A11DAC88256E5A00707B21/$file/0010149.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Hawkins appeals from the district court's order affirming the magistrate judge's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained as the result of the warrantless stop of his truck as he was about to leave McClellan Air Force Base ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/349C18D74C141B4688256B7C000AF7EF/$file/0115303.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: We must decide whether the statutory protections afforded Social Security and Supplemental Security Income ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5948AA850E3D51BC88256D8E005A5204/$file/0255368.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Contends that his potentially indefinite detention by the Immigration and Naturalization Service ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/01/943845P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. BACKGROUND Hamilton is incarcerated at the maximum security Potosi The facility provides crossCorrectional Center (Potosi).1 denominational religious facilities inside prison buildings. American Indian inmates at Potosi are allowed to pray. American Indians are also allowed to carry medicine bags containing ceremonial items and have access to a ceremonial pipe and kinnikinnik (a ceremonial </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/443A0DB2ECC5D4A188256A45005D38DA/$file/0010149.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Hawkins appeals from the district court's order affirming the magistrate judge's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained as the result of the warrantless stop of his truck as he was about to leave McClellan Air Force Base ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F4B61F8BFB6E62CA88256BB3008304C6/$file/0115303.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: in the caption on page 1. FA </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug97/97-2229.opa.html">AM. ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY V. DEP'T OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVS.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Am. These programs are administered by the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/16D4E3306B91D50988256C4B00542608/$file/9971317.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2002 is amended to include docket number 00 70189. Which was inadvertently omitted from the opinion caption. Establishes an elaborate and complicated structure that governs labor relations in almost all of the industries within the nation's private sector.1 Collective bargaining is the central concern of that structure. Labor unions are essential to the collective bargaining process. That helps secure the role of unions in the collective bargaining process by permitting 1 The National Labor Relations Act was enacted in 1935 and significantly amended in 1947. The railroad industry is covered separately by the Railway Labor Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="560"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug97/97-2229.opa.html">AM. ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY V. DEP'T OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVS.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Am. These programs are administered by the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="558"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTc5ODFfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-7981_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 963.01 in damages and prejudgment interest for goods carried by appellant that were stolen prior to delivery. Who was a member of the panel. 963.01 in damages and prejudgment interest to plaintiff Security Insurance Company of Hartford ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/9_opinions/86-0006q.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1810.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that Oyola was not disabled at step five of the sequential evaluation process set out in 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(f). The ALJ determined that Oyola's epilepsy was a severe impairment which precluded him from returning to his previous employment. That Oyola did not have a disabling emotional or mental condition. Although the ALJ found that Oyola could not engage in work in which he would have to climb or balance. He determined that Oyola was not 1. The medical record shows that Oyola only occasionally complained of pain or of other medical problems that might have caused him pain. He was advised to rest for a week. No medication or course of treatment was prescribed. Was prescribed medicine. He was reported stable when he left the hospital. Although the 1985 medical 3 report is practically unreadable. It appears to indicate that medication was prescribed for Oyola's pain. His failure to do so was not error under the circumstances. The medical records evidencing Oyola's reports of pain are not very probative. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200502/04-3138a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Joel Kurtzberg. Reid Alan Cox was on the brief for amicus curiae Center for Individual Freedom in support of appellants. Jr. were on the brief for amici curiae Magazine Publishers of America. Is protected by a reporter's privilege arising from the First Amendment. We agree with the District Court that there is no First Amendment privilege protecting the evidence sought. It is not absolute. We further conclude that other assignments of error raised by appellants are without merit. In which he claimed to have been sent to Niger in 2002 by the Central Intelligence Agency ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar98/96-6944.man.html">NLRB V. TRIPLE A FIRE PROTECTION, INC. (3/3/1998, NO. 96-6944)<BR></A><BR> Inc. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199906/97-1648a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were George A. With him on the briefs was Lawrence W. With him on the brief were Frank W. With him on the brief were Frank W. Both groups have brought petitions for judicial review of their designations pursuant to 8 U.S.C. s 1189(b)(1).1 1 Because these separate petitions involve the same statute and similar claims. I The statute before us is unique. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar98/96-6944.man.html">NLRB V. TRIPLE A FIRE PROTECTION, INC. (3/3/1998, NO. 96-6944)<BR></A><BR> Inc. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/110D1540C1A77EC888256E6D00592718/$file/9917551o.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The petition is therefore denied. The stay of the issuance of the mandate is vacated. No liberties are safe if courts can so easily erase them. No lover of liberty can be confident that an important right will never become so disfavored in popular or elite opinion as to be vulnerable to being discarded like the Second Amendment. KING 4167 I have spelled out in great detail why our court's view of the Second Amendment is indefensible. I will not restate them here. Our court takes what to me is a position verging on droll legal humor. That the right is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5C2C7B617CF4232588256F8E007FF142/$file/0350491.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Published at 383 F.3d 1093 (9th Cir. 2004) is amended as follows: on page 1097. The Supreme Court had before it a disputed warrantless search conducted by prohibition agents who were looking for contraband whiskey suspected to be in an automobile. The whiskey was finally discovered when the agents tore open the car's upholstery in the area of the car's rumble seat. The issue was whether the search violated the Fourth Amendment. The Court began its constitutional analysis of the tearing open of the upholstery by establishing for automobiles an exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement: We have made a somewhat extended reference to these statutes to show that the guaranty of freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures by the 4th Amendment has been construed. Where it is not practicable to secure a warrant because the vehicle can be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant must be sought. The Court held that the warrantless tearing open of the vehicle's upholstery was not UNITED STATES v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1867.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom Hern ndez S nchez Law Firm was on brief for appellants. With whom Schuster Aguil & Santiago was on brief for appellees. Were regular employees of SMI which is not a party to this action in Humacao. It is uncontested that SMI's employees are mostly Puerto Rican. Kerr and Dunne of BMSC were sent to Puerto Rico in 1991 and 1992 in connection with a security investigation regarding missing inventory at SMI and the suspected illegal trafficking of pharmaceutical drugs and other products. Appellants were dismissed from their employment at SMI between March and May 1992 without being told the reason for their dismissal. It is uncontested that no one else participated in these interviews except for a translator. That it was Appellants that subsequently publicized the details of the interviews. 3 DISCUSSION DISCUSSION Appellants raise four challenges to the district court's grant of summary judgment: (i) discovery was improperly cut off. (ii) their production of documents was erroneously denied. (iii) summary judgment was erroneously granted on their conspiracy claims. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-2231.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Rivero Vergne and Moreda & Moreda were on brief. With whom Mercado & Soto was on brief. Including Baldorioty de Castro Avenue (the main thoroughfare leading to and from the airport).2 The labor unrest was open and notorious. There are two plaintiffs Carol Coyne and her husband. Since the insurer's liability is coextensive with its insured's. We treat the appeal as if Carol Coyne and Taber were the sole parties in interest. 2The obstructionist tactics met with some degree of success. This appeal ensued. 3A rational factfinder could infer that not only the man who blocked the Ford's path but also the rock throwers were strikers or strike sympathizers. 3 II. Show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/032274.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lynch Construction was building a maintenance facility on the Greenbrier's property. It is a major artery for traffic heading to and from the Greenbrier. Traffic along Highway 60 is especially heavy during the morning and afternoon commutes. The speed limit is 55 m.p.h. on the portion of Highway 60 where the Union chose to picket. The Greenbrier's security director flagged down a White Sulphur Springs police officer who was passing by on Highway 60 and informed him about the picketers.1 That officer went to where the picketers were protesting and ordered them to move their vehicles. Which were parked in an unauthorized zone along Highway 60. The general manager of the Greenbrier approached the picketers to ask what they were doing at the Greenbrier's employee entrance. The picketers informed him that they were picketThe officer testified that he already knew about the picketers before he spoke with the Greenbrier's security director. 1 4 CSX HOTELS. NLRB ing Lynch Construction and that the Lynch Construction employees were using the Greenbrier's employee entrance. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1510.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is a qui tam action. Sitting by designation. (2) The Latin phrase </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200507/03-7143a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Robert J. With him on the brief were Robert M. It places others in programs geared to youths who have committed less serious crimes or seem relatively likely to stay out of trouble. No minimum standards were required of District providers generally. Who did have experience with at risk youths but. Nor did these doors have locks. Doors leading into individual units did have locks. All of which was the case at Queenstown </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200606/05-5017a.pdf">O:\OPN\KATE\KISSINGER\GONZALEZ-VERA V. KISSINGER.V9.WPD<BR></A><BR> With him on the brief was Michael E. Green were on the brief for amicus curiae Center for Constitutional Rights in support of appellants. 2 Robert M. With him on the brief were Gregory G. After the release of a report from the United States Department of State suggesting Kissinger was aware of human rights violations committed by the DINA. The plaintiffs argued the case was justiciable and they had stated </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E4A09D8EAA46F12B88256B870061677B/$file/9971317.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Establishes an elaborate and complicated structure that governs labor relations in almost all of the industries within the nation's private sector.1 Collective bargaining is the 1 The National Labor Relations Act was enacted in 1935 and significantly amended in 1947. Labor unions are essential to the collective bargaining process. That helps secure the role of unions in the collective bargaining process by permitting unions and employers to enter into agreements requiring employees to become union members.2 It is the interpretation of that provision that is at issue in this case. The railroad industry is covered separately by the Railway Labor Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-6062.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs are employees of the City of Altus. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291. Approximately 29 City employees are Hispanic. All Plaintiffs are Hispanic and bilingual. Received a complaint that because Street Department employees were speaking Spanish. Other employees could not understand what was being said on <hr> the City radio. Sanchez was particularly concerned that his subordinates. The letter informed Nettles that employees had not been given proper notice if this was a new administrative policy and questioned whether Willis and the City had followed proper procedures in implementing the new policy. Sanchez reported that Willis had told him that the reason Hispanics speak Spanish </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/04/97-1421.htm">97-1421 -- UNITED INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS INC. V. WHARF (HOLDINGS) LIMITED -- 04/28/2000<BR></A><BR> NYNEX devoted its resources to this early phase of the project with the tacit understanding that if Wharf received the award and both Wharf and NYNEX were comfortable with the relationship and the project. NYNEX would have an opportunity to invest in the communications company or possibly garner an operations and maintenance contract for its efforts. <p> Mark Schneider. UIH is based in Denver. UIH representatives made it clear they were not interested in serving as a consultant on the project for a fee. Would commit their resources in exchange for a right to invest in CNCL if Wharf was awarded the license. In response to UIH overtures that it was interested in obtaining a greater ownership interest. A foreign company is not permitted to own more than 10% in the cable operator. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/04/971582P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That such an employer shall not discriminate against an employee for nonmembership if the employer </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0137p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-2524.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ahmed was placed in removal proceedings pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Because he feared that he would be killed by the same militants if he were compelled to return to his native Algeria. The FIS was poised to repeat its success in the next round of national elections and would likely have commanded an absolute parliamentary majority when a military coup in January 1992 brought the entire process to an abrupt halt. After several of his colleagues were killed by armed Islamic militants while being transported by bus from the airport where they served as security guards to the government compound where they lived. Ahmed was placed in removal proceedings. The IJ concluded that Ahmed was statutorily ineligible for relief. Because he had not pointed to anything that was separable from the occupational hazards that went along with those jobs. Our review throughout is governed by the substantial evidence standard. We assess whether the BIA's determination was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/022317.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. That its claim to those portions is superior to the claims of Pepper Hamilton and MLCA. Colkitt are siblings. Were insured. Colkitt was an officer and director of National Medical Financial Services. National Union agreed to provide his defense under a reserThe Rahman Agreement was one of four settlement agreements entered into by the United States. The other settlement agreements are not relevant to the issues on appeal. 2 10 UNITED STATES v. 2000 were not covered by the D&O policy and would not be paid. COLKITT 11 it would not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/949B3155AF8EDC7988256B4B0008A499/$file/9935711.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> CV 98 03073 JAR OPINION *Jo Anne Barnhart is substituted for her predecessor as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Thomas' applications were denied initially and upon reconsideration. A hearing was held before an administrative law judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="548"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-7165a.html">BROWN ANTHONY ET AL V. PRO FTBL INC<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="548"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jun2000/981842.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The statutes governing Breyer's claim to citizenship are S 1993 of the Revised Statutes of 1874 and a 1994 amendment to the Immigration and Naturalization Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="548"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/aug96/95-7139.wpd.html">WINFREY V. CHATER<BR></A><BR> Plaintiff appeals the district court's affirmance of the Secretary's decision denying him disability insurance benefits.(1) Plaintiff claims to have been disabled since April 1991 as a result of pain in his neck. As that work is generally performed in the national economy. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="545"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0336p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> On the ground that her condition had improved to the point that she was no longer </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="545"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1176.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. LLP</U> were on brief. There are two. Asseverate that the virtual shares were part of a fantasy investment game created for the personal entertainment of Internet users. 3 (1st Cir. 1996).</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="545"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/53333A1C2A376D138825723B005F9EE5/$file/0415044.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was denied entry. The Kamehameha Schools were created through a charitable testamentary trust. Plaintiff argues that he was denied admission because of his race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Factual Background Historical Context2 The islands of Hawaii are geographically isolated in the South Pacific Ocean and were originally settled sometime between 1 and 750 A.D. The immediate result of that first encounter was that Native Hawaiians were introduced to Western goods and Western diseases. The first treaty was signed in 1826. Additional treaties were signed in 1849. Was commercially desirable. Western economic domination of the Hawaiian Islands was followed by an interest in establishing political control. Was overthrown by a small group of nonHawaiians. Who were assisted in their efforts by the United States Minister. Laws were then enacted suppressing the Hawaiian culture and language and allowing for the displacement of Native Hawaiians from their lands. The Hawaiian language was banned as a medium of instruction in schools. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="545"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200412/03-5262a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="545"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1995/95a1172p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will reverse. The Parties Keystone was a farm cooperative that processed and sold food products. Food products on Keystone's premises were not included in Keystone's inventory unless and until Keystone actually purchased them. It is undisputed that the Bank had first priority with respect to these items. Are Ontario Grape Growers' Marketing Board. The primary contract was the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="545"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5F41FEA7784DE9948825713400038F2A/$file/0410226.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The initial screening was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1310.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C.</U> was on brief for appellant Richard Houle.</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr2002/01-11863.opn.html">ANDERSON V. H&R BLOCK, INC. (4/3/2002, NO. 01-11863)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/042828np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Donatelli challenges the Administrative Law Judge's ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2503.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> LLP</SPAN> were on brief for plaintiff appellant/cross appellee. <P> <SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1A0DBBBC531F189E88256C0C007EA539/$file/0115303.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ORDER Appellee's Petition for Rehearing is GRANTED. Is withdrawn. An Opinion will be filed contemporaneously with this Order. Circuit Judge: We must decide whether the statutory protections afforded Social Security and Supplemental Security Income ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/064280np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will reverse and remand this matter for further findings. The application was denied initially and upon reconsideration. The ALJ denied Meyler's application.1 Meyler avers that a subsequent SSI application was granted and she has been receiving SSI payments since April 2004. Until April 2004. 2 1 Meyler was born on August 10. She was 50 years old and had a high school education. He opined her </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200014947.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The government's appeal of his separate bond case is therefore moot. The first action is the government's effort to remove Al Najjar from the United States due to the expiration of his status as a legal alien. Which is the subject of this appeal. Is Al Najjar's bid to be released from detention on bond during the pendency of his deportation proceedings. It is the recent and final completion of the first action that renders the instant case unambiguously moot. Al Najjar was born in Gaza in 1957 and moved with his family to Saudi Arabia one year later. The basis of the allegation was a claim by Al Najjar's first wife that she had participated in a sham marriage to allow him to obtain a green card. The case against Al Najjar was closed when he failed to appear at an administrative hearing. Those proceedings were consolidated with deportation proceedings for his wife. Various individuals who have supported and engaged in terrorism in the Middle East. Federal agents arrested Al Najjar on the basis of classified information that he was connected to Middle Eastern terrorist organizations and detained him without bond on the ground that he posed a threat to national security. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr2002/01-11863.opn.html">ANDERSON V. H&R BLOCK, INC. (4/3/2002, NO. 01-11863)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2C9DA0B9E0EF65B988256C7E0016340E/$file/0115303.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: At page 905. Do not have the option of receiving their benefits directly and do not voluntarily execute LOPEZ v. F.A. 5 contractual agreements regarding how overdrafts will be treated </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/04/021486P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was hit over the head with a tire iron. After Fastner's applications were denied initially and upon reconsideration. The ALJ found that Fastner was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act and thus was not entitled to benefits. We review the Commissioner's decision to determine whether it is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0144p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because we are unable to agree with the district court's interpretation of Howard. Her claim was denied initially and upon reconsideration. This individual may only occasionally climb or balance and is not to stoop. This individual is limited to simple to moderately complex tasks in a low stress. This individual is moderately limited in ability to maintain concentration and attention for extended periods. In your opinion are there light and sedentary unskilled job categories recognized by the Secretary that such an individual could be expected to be able to perform? Q. If I were to ask you to further assume that this individual has need to avoid an environment of excessive dust. The case was referred to a magistrate judge who issued a report and recommendation concluding that the ALJ had erred in relying upon Woolwine's testimony because it had been elicited using incomplete hypothetical questions. The magistrate judge interpreted Howard as holding that ALJs were only permitted to rely upon vocational expert testimony regarding the availability of employment if the hypothetical questions eliciting that testimony listed the claimant's medical conditions. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-5058.html">ASSOCIATED ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC V. U.S.<BR></A><BR> Of counsel was <u>Jason A. With her on the brief were <u>Loretta C. We affirm.</p> <p ALIGN= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200406/03-1074a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/sept95/94-4017.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. The relevant facts underlying this litigation are undisputed and may be briefly stated as follows. The case was converted to a Chapter 7 proceeding on April 30. Christiansen was contractually obligated to the owner of the project to deliver the project free of mechanics liens. We agree with the parties that no material fact disputes exist and that we are called upon to review only legal issues. 2 under which a defendant may assert a counterclaim against a plaintiff </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="538"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/08/97-1195.htm">97-1195 -- BENNETT V. COORS BREWING CO. -- 08/27/1999<BR></A><BR> Even if the releases were invalid due to fraud. Appellants were among twenty eight employees in the security department at Coors. Both the EVSP and EERW were one time benefits packages offered to qualified employees who volunteered to terminate employment or retire during the election period. <p> Between August and October of 1993. Eligible employees in the security department were given the option of participating in the EVSP or the EERW. A decision that if approved would have eliminated all twenty eight positions in the department. Appellants were aware of rumors of potential outsourcing in the late summer of 1993. When they were considering whether to accept one of the benefit packages. <p> On September 20. Is brainstorming and evaluating all kinds of ideas. <p> Aplts' App. Coors announced that security was not going to be outsourced at the present time. Warder Bennett was paid a $9. Including your separation from employment . . . . <p> You agree that the legal rights and claims that you are giving up include. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="538"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-9585.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <hr> HARTZ. Benad Abiodun is a native and citizen of Nigeria who entered the United States lawfully in 1996. He contends that (1) he was nationalized when he signed an oath of allegiance as part of his naturalization application process. (2) his due process and statutory rights were violated when his application for naturalization was denied. (3) the records of the Colorado conviction on which his removal was based were falsified. The verdict was not supported by sufficient evidence. (4) his due process rights were violated by the issuance of an immigration detainer shortly after his state conviction. Holding that signing an oath of allegiance during a naturalization examination is insufficient to confer citizenship. Removal proceedings are not a proper forum to attack either the denial of an application for naturalization or a state court conviction. There is no record support for a claim of falsification. His application for naturalization was denied by the Denver District Director of the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="538"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-1402.html">WILLIAM O. SCHISM V. U.S.<BR></A><BR> Argued for plaintiffs appellants.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="538"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/99opinions/99-1029a.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Argued the cause for respondent.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span><o:p></o:p></pre><pre>With her on the brief were David M. <span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Voss' chal <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>lenge depends solely upon the exoneration of Graham.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Be <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>cause we conclude that the Commission's decision was reason <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>able and supported by substantial evidence. </o:p></pre><pre><span style='mso spacerun:yes'>     </span>Voss is the owner and president of an independent discount <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>brokerage firm. <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Virginia.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Graham began working in the securities industry in <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>1982 and joined VCI in September of 1984.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>She was a <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>registered representative. 1 as well as VCI's cashier and back <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>office assistant.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>She was also VCI's primary ". </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="538"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200313705.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. BACKGROUND The main issue on appeal is under what circumstances may an Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="538"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200008/99-1029a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the brief were David M. Be cause we conclude that the Commission's decision was reason able and supported by substantial evidence. I Voss is the owner and president of an independent discount brokerage firm. She was a registered representative. She was also VCI's primary </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="538"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1F0661BBB4AB351F882571340003F717/$file/0556759.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ahilan Nadarajah was repeatedly tortured in Sri Lanka. He fled to the United States where he was detained upon arrival. The government's arguments against the grant of immigration relief have been rejected and Nadarajah has been awarded relief by an immigration judge. This decision was affirmed by the Board of Immigration Appeals. I This is a case about one individual. The backdrop of this case is the quarter century old battle between the government of Sri Lanki and a group known as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-7008a.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With </P> <P>him on the briefs were Kevin C. Was on the brief for </P> <P>amicus curiae District of Columbia Financial Responsibility </P> <P>&. On the brief </P> <P>were Brendan V. </P> <P>the District of Columbia contends that the officers are enti </P> <P>tled to qualified immunity because. It was not </P> <P>clearly established prior to Eric Butera's death that the </P> <P>officers' conduct would violate these rights. </P> <P>the appeal presents two questions of first impression in this </P> <P>circuit: (1) whether the District of Columbia can be held </P> <P>constitutionally liable for failing to protect an individual who </P> <P>is not in custody from harm inflicted by a third party. </P> <P>through which Eric Butera might have succeeded in proving a </P> <P>constitutional violation. Was not clearly established prior to </P> <P>his death. The officers were entitled to qualified immu </P> <P>nity. We also hold that there is no parental due process right </P> <P>to the company of an adult child who is independent. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb2001/001151.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an issue on which the Courts of Appeals are divided. We will refer only to the former in the text. 2 not presented to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) should not be reviewed by the district court nor be the basis of a remand to the Commissioner unless the evidence is new and material and there is good cause for not having produced the evidence earlier. The issue is one of first impression for this court. Her claim was denied initially and again on reconsideration. Which was held on September 21. The ALJ found that Matthews was not disabled and denied her claim. Also testified at the hearing and stated there were a significant number of sedentary and unskilled jobs. Concluding that Matthews was not disabled. That Matthews' testimony on the severity of her impairments was not credible inasmuch as she could use public transportation and engage in social activities without much difficulty. That Matthews is unable to per form any of her past relevant work as a teacher's aide or hospital worker. That although she is unable to perform the full range of sedentary work. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/01/98-1375.htm">98-1375 -- MED SAFE NORTHWEST INC. V. KOCKOS -- 01/05/2001<BR></A><BR> Defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug2000/99-13065.man.html">UNITED STATES V. PLUMMER (8/11/2000, NO. 99-13065)<BR></A><BR> A United States and Bahamian citizen whose boat allegedly was in possession of over $50. 000 dollars worth of Cuban cigars when it was halted off the Florida coast. Plummer was charged in Count I with attempting to smuggle the cigars into the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 545 and in Count II with unauthorized transportation outside of the United States of merchandise manufactured in Cuba in violation of the Trading With the Enemy Act. Holding that Defendant was not inside United States territorial waters when seized and thus could not be guilty of attempted smuggling. The allegations are straightforward. Count II alleges that Plummer </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/006540.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Morrison alleged that defendants refused to consider his request to obtain Native American religious items because he is not of Native American heritage. Inmates are required to specify their claimed religion. The purpose for which each item is used. Why each item is necessary. Whether each item is mandated by their religion. A religious leader of the professed faith is contacted to verify the relevance of and need for the item. Morrison is not a Native American Indian by birth. He is. HEART is not a religion. The majority of its members at GCC are not Native Americans and. That everything has a spirit and is connected. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug2000/99-13065.man.html">UNITED STATES V. PLUMMER (8/11/2000, NO. 99-13065)<BR></A><BR> A United States and Bahamian citizen whose boat allegedly was in possession of over $50. 000 dollars worth of Cuban cigars when it was halted off the Florida coast. Plummer was charged in Count I with attempting to smuggle the cigars into the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 545 and in Count II with unauthorized transportation outside of the United States of merchandise manufactured in Cuba in violation of the Trading With the Enemy Act. Holding that Defendant was not inside United States territorial waters when seized and thus could not be guilty of attempted smuggling. The allegations are straightforward. Count II alleges that Plummer </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2000/993856.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which have been consolidated before the district court for pretrial purposes. Which is in the business of purchasing such delinquent claims from municipalities in several states. Appendix references are to the appendix filed in Nos. 99 3858 and 99 3859. 4 September 1996. The City and the School District entered into a Purchase Agreement whereby existing claims and liens for unpaid taxes and sewer charges were assigned to NTF.2 App. at 517. Ltd. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200101/00-7008a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Kevin C. Was on the brief for amicus curiae District of Columbia Financial Responsibility & Management Assistance Authority. On the brief were Brendan V. The District of Columbia contends that the officers are enti tled to qualified immunity because. It was not clearly established prior to Eric Butera's death that the officers' conduct would violate these rights. The appeal presents two questions of first impression in this circuit: (1) whether the District of Columbia can be held constitutionally liable for failing to protect an individual who is not in custody from harm inflicted by a third party. Through which Eric Butera might have succeeded in proving a constitutional violation. Was not clearly established prior to his death. The officers were entitled to qualified immu nity. We also hold that there is no parental due process right to the company of an adult child who is independent. The officers were entitled to summary judgment on all claims brought under 42 U.S.C. s 1983. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-1962_023.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Where she was born and raised. We find that the immigration judge's credibility determinations were not supported 2 No. 04 1962 by cogent reasons bearing a legitimate nexus to the finding. I. Giday's tale of mixed ancestry is a familiar one. Her partial Ethiopian ancestry (her mother is Ethiopian and her father Eritrean) subjected her to persecution by the Eritrean Government. She testified that she was born in 1979 in Asmara. When Giday was six. She explained to the national service officers that she was attending school and soon to be married. She testified that she was able to avoid serving by moving from her mother's house to her fiance's house whenever she heard word that government officials were on their way. Giday's brothers were conscripted into the national service and Giday stated that she has not heard from either her mother or brothers since that time. Giday initially testified that she was detained because her mother was Ethiopian and also because she had failed to serve in the national service a second time. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="535"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Sept2002/002525.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Companies argue that the Act is unconstitutional as applied to them pursuant to Eastern Enterprises v. We conclude that the assignments are not unconstitutional as applied. It will be helpful to explain the historical background and context of this dispute. I. THE COAL ACT The Coal Act was enacted in 1992 </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200410438.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> KAHN CLERK FILED Appellant David Best challenges the district court's dismissal of his complaint seeking review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of his removal from his civilian technician position with the Florida Air National Guard (FLANG).1 We conclude review of Best's removal is precluded by the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) and affirm. I. BACKGROUND Best was employed full time by FLANG as a federal civilian excepted service technician. Best was also a member of FLANG. Consequently Best's access to classified and restricted information and areas was terminated. This rating was due. Statutory Framework </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar97/95-5398.man.html">BROOKS V. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Brooks v. Senior Circuit Judges.<p> <p> PER CURIAM:<p> <p> The district court's grant of summary judgment to the Defendants is AFFIRMED based upon the holding and rationale contained in Part III.A of the district court's September 22. A copy of which is attached as Appendix A hereto. We have no occasion to reach the remaining issues addressed in other parts of that order and imply no view concerning any of them.<p> AFFIRMED.<p> ATTACHMENT<p> <p> APPENDIX A<p> <p> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. It is hereby<p> ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:<p> 1. Defendant Blue Cross's motion to dismiss the amended complaint (DE # 31) is GRANTED. Defendant New York Life's motion for instructions and an Order directed to Plaintiff's counsel (DE # 46) is DENIED AS MOOT. Defendant New York Life's combined motion to dismiss and/or for summary judgment (DE # 47) is GRANTED. Defendant New York Life's corrected motion for more definite statement and for RICO case statement (DE # 56) is DENIED AS MOOT. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar97/95-5398.man.html">BROOKS V. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Brooks v. Senior Circuit Judges.<p> <p> PER CURIAM:<p> <p> The district court's grant of summary judgment to the Defendants is AFFIRMED based upon the holding and rationale contained in Part III.A of the district court's September 22. A copy of which is attached as Appendix A hereto. We have no occasion to reach the remaining issues addressed in other parts of that order and imply no view concerning any of them.<p> AFFIRMED.<p> ATTACHMENT<p> <p> APPENDIX A<p> <p> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. It is hereby<p> ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:<p> 1. Defendant Blue Cross's motion to dismiss the amended complaint (DE # 31) is GRANTED. Defendant New York Life's motion for instructions and an Order directed to Plaintiff's counsel (DE # 46) is DENIED AS MOOT. Defendant New York Life's combined motion to dismiss and/or for summary judgment (DE # 47) is GRANTED. Defendant New York Life's corrected motion for more definite statement and for RICO case statement (DE # 56) is DENIED AS MOOT. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1405.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Herrero & Jim nez were on brief for appellants. Peirats and Pietrantoni Mendez & Alvarez were on brief for appellee Centro Medico Del Turabo. The district court said it was dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). Stated in the judgment that the complaint was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The preferable practice is to assume that jurisdiction exists and proceed to determine whether the claim passes muster under Rule 12(b)(6). 682 83 (1946) (where the merits of the action are intertwined with the issue of jurisdiction. The federal claim should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction only if the claim is immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction or if the claim is clearly frivolous or wholly insubstantial). 280 (1st Cir. 1990) (since plaintiff's assertion that federal law implied a private right of action was not frivolous. Should have been premised upon Rule 12(b)(6)). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/982398.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We reverse and remand for further proceedings. 1 This suit was instituted by The Pittston Company. Disputes concerning health care for miners date back to the time early in this century when such care was funded with a prepayment plan through payroll deductions and was supplied by company doctors. From the late 1940s through the early 1970s pension and medical benefits were provided by several UMWA funds created under a series of National Bituminous Coal Wage Agreements (NBCWAs). The funding for these benefits was supplied in part by a royalty on each ton of coal mined and in part by payroll deductions. Was responsible for providing benefits only to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-2161.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Daley & White were on brief. Grasso and Mortensen were on brief. We hold that the FDIC has no such shield and is liable. The units in the Hotel were marketed and sold by the University Bank and Trust Company and the other defendants as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1996/96a1412p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. INTRODUCTION Hyatt Corporation is the manager of a resort hotel on St. The district court had subject matter jurisdiction under either 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2) (action between citizens of a state and citizens or subjects of a foreign state) or 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(3) (action between citizens of different states in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties). We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and exercise plenary review over the grant of partial summary judgment and abuse of discretion review over the court's transition order. Great Cruz was looking for a company to maximize the economic potential of the resort. Hyatt was reticent to commit the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1202.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellant.</P> <BR WP= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTQ3NzAtY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-4770-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: The sole issue on this appeal is whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="532"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/09/033374P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> These were so called fronting policies. Terra also had an excess </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDA0LTA0NTMtY3Zfc28ucGRm/04-0453-cv_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/061813np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Appellant Mary Horodenski appeals a District Court decision upholding an Administrative Law Judge's determination that Horodenski was not entitled to Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) under the Social Security Act. Whether the Administrative Law Judge's decision was supported by substantial evidence. Because we find that it was. We will affirm. Our summary of the facts is brief. Her application was denied. A hearing on Horodenski's application was held before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on May 2. Holding that she was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. The District Court granted the Commissioner's motion for a voluntary remand after the SSA was unable to produce a complete transcript of the May 2. Because certain portions of the audio recording of that proceeding were inaudible. 2 Upon remand. Horodenski testified that she was employed by General Electric as an assembler for six years prior to her alleged disability onset date of July 1. Horodenski testified that her husband and mother in law were forced to perform the bulk of household chores. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2057.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Were on brief. We hold that notice was adequate for the purposes of the particular ESA claim on appeal here. The ESA directs federal agencies to insure that agency action </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1107_019.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> As we have noted before. A judge may grant summary judgment for a moving party only where there are no genuine issues of material fact in dispute and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Because our only task upon review of a summary judgment motion is to determine </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTY3NTQtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-6754-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is reasonable. The precise 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 issue before us is whether one such search regime. Each plaintiff either submitted to a baggage search and entered the subway or refused the search and consequently was required to exit the subway system. The District Court erred in balancing the relevant factors because (a) the searches are intrusive. (b) there is no immediate terrorist threat. (c) the City's evidence fails as a 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 matter of law to establish that the Program is effective. We hold that preventing a terrorist attack on the subway is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-3817_024.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A third party computer </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/06/99-1089.htm">99-1089 -- U.S. V. AKERS -- 06/12/2000<BR></A><BR> Akers ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200414949.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Transtecs argues that summary judgment was inappropriate because the district court erred as a matter of law in concluding that a request to take a polygraph exam alone constitutes an EPPA violation. Transtecs and its employees have access to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/032246p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/BF7896CC52D246CA882573440058992B/$file/0516128.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Astrue is substituted for his predecessor Jo Anne Barnhardt as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. Hoopai's alleged disability was based on back pain and depression. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Hoopai is a 50 year old man with an eleventh grade education and work history as a construction laborer. He asserts that back pain and mental impairments from an on the job injury have caused him to be permanently and completely disabled. That he was not able to perform any HOOPAI v. That he was limited to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/01opinions/01-5094.html">CHRIS PARADISSIOTIS V. U.S.<BR></A><BR> Argued for defendant appellee.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/063477np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Martin ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7758D5B8300A072588256E8D00126BB2/$file/0315305.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The question is one of first impression in this circuit. Are governed by the [Act]. The most prominent distinction between the procedures available under the federal Act and those available under Arizona law is that the latter provides for a judicial determination of the fair value of dissenting shareholders' shares. Section 215a(a) addresses the merging bank's requirement to notify its shareholders of a plan of merger and to have that plan ratified and confirmed by the affirmative vote of the shareholders of each such association or State bank owning at least two thirds of its capital stock outstanding. Or by a greater proportion of such capital stock in the case of a State bank if the laws of the State where it is organized so require . . . . 5878 COMMUNITY BANK OF ARIZONA v. Once the merger is approved. Section 215a(c) sets out the process by which the dissenting shareholder's shares are appraised. Any dissenting shareholder who is dissatisfied with the appraised value arrived at by this method has the right to appeal to the Comptroller of Currency. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb1995/95a0984p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Trans Penn contends these claims are preempted because they relate to mandatory subjects of collective bargaining and require interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement. The employees then sought leave to delete their RICO claims and have the case remanded back to state court. We have jurisdiction to address this claim under the All Writs Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (1988).[fn1] We hold that resolution of the employees' contract and tort claims is not substantially dependent upon an analysis of the collective bargaining agreement and therefore section 301 does not require preemption. We will deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. Trans Penn is a Pennsylvania corporation engaged in the manufacture of industrial wax products in Titusville. The election was certified by the National Labor Relations Board on May 7. The document is entitled </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200304/02-5080a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/05-5011.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record. Alexander was employed as an excepted service technician with the Michigan Air National Guard ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTY3NTQtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-6754-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is reasonable. The precise 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 issue before us is whether one such search regime. Each plaintiff either submitted to a baggage search and entered the subway or refused the search and consequently was required to exit the subway system. The District Court erred in balancing the relevant factors because (a) the searches are intrusive. (b) there is no immediate terrorist threat. (c) the City's evidence fails as a 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 matter of law to establish that the Program is effective. We hold that preventing a terrorist attack on the subway is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="530"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1464.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellant.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/BF9231D76D3FEB6C88256AA3005AC423/$file/9935555.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Massanari is substituted for Kenneth S. For the defendant appellee. 10474 ORDER The opinion in this appeal is amended as follows: Wherever the words </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C4F763C9F24788C788256E5A00707B98/$file/9935555.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Massanari is substituted for Kenneth S. Is a fifty year old former sawmill laborer who left school after the eighth grade. 1 Edlund was examined by a series of doctors following an initial knee injury and subsequent complaints of hip and lower back pain. Edlund was treated several times for a fractured rib. For which he was given various pain medications. There was little objective evidence of physical abnormalities or damage. Nor was there any evidence of Edlund's inability to work. Edlund was probably suffering from a herni 1 From 1986 until 1993. Christiansen stated that Edlund was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B954F843B2C4C24D88256E5A00707C3D/$file/9935555.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Massanari is substituted for Kenneth S. For the defendant appellee. 10474 ORDER The opinion in this appeal is amended as follows: Wherever the words </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200006/99-1338a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was W. With him on the brief were Linda Sher. With him on the brief were Michael B. Petitioners are individual employees who are rep resented in collective bargaining by the International Union. Petitioners are not mem bers of the Union. Which is the organizational body that coordinates the Union's activities and is also the collective bargaining agent for represented employees. Nonmembers who so insist are charged a reduced </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E4F3F3436F36330688256A6B005C1A92/$file/9935555.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Massanari is substituted for Kenneth S. Is a fifty year old former sawmill laborer who left school after the eighth grade. 1 Edlund was examined by a series of doctors following an initial knee injury and subsequent complaints of hip and lower back pain. Edlund was treated several times for a fractured rib. For which he was given various pain medications. There was little objective evidence of physical abnormalities or damage. Nor was there any evidence of Edlund's inability to work. Edlund was probably suffering from a herni 1 From 1986 until 1993. Christiansen stated that Edlund was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/dec97/96-3556.man.html">UNITED STATES V. ROSS (12/19/1997, NO. 96-3556)<BR></A><BR> The Government persuaded the jury that Ross and Adams conspired to obtain money for their personal use and benefit from two financially troubled insurance companies by falsely representing that the loans were to be used solely for business purposes. Ross and Adams and their co conspirators created shell corporations and contrived deceptive paper transactions that had no economic substance.</P> <P> Ross and Adams contend that the evidence presented to the jury is insufficient to sustain a conviction. They assert that the district court miscalculated their sentence and applied a sentencing guideline that is unconstitutional. Under separate headings.</P> <P> We affirm the judgment of conviction because we conclude the evidence is sufficient to persuade a rational trier of fact of the guilt of the accused of each crime. We hold that the court's rulings on the admissibility of evidence and its decision to reject defense instructions were free from error.</P> <P> We vacate the sentence imposed on each defendant and remand for resentencing because the district court failed to make an independent finding that it was persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that Ross and Adams conspired to commit the offense of money laundering.</P> <P><CENTER>I</CENTER> </P> <P><CENTER>SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE</CENTER> </P> <P><CENTER>A. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1956.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C. were on brief. Albiani and Associates were on brief. At issue is the important LYNCH. That advantage is denied to resident single family homeowners by 1322(b)(2). Are nonetheless available to owner occupants of multi family housing. We hold that Congress intends exactly such different results and that the antimodification provision of 1322(b)(2) does not bar modification of a secured claim on a multi unit property in which one unit is the debtor's principal residence and the security interest extends tothe other income producing units. 1. The term </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/063914np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sitting by designation. * William Yensick applied for and was denied supplemental security income. Summary judgment was granted for the Commissioner. He argues that the ALJ erred at the final stage of the five step process for determining whether a claimant is entitled to disability benefits. We will vacate the order of summary judgment and remand this case for further proceedings. Who are familiar with the factual context and the procedural history of the case. We will set forth only those facts necessary to our analysis. His findings are set forth in the ALJ's written opinion. Goyette concluded </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0148p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Issue 3 In this case we are called upon to decide whether or not the official motto of the State of Ohio. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-7132.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Mullens's impairments were severe but did not meet the criteria of any of the impairments listed in 20 C.F.R. Direct application was not allowed because Mr. The ALJ stated that he was therefore using the grids </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F5D510C6B0DAD1098825721300746E91/$file/0435890.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction to review under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We reverse and remand because the Commissioner's decision is not supported by substantial evidence. After his applications were denied initially and upon reconsideration. Robbins requested and was granted a hearing in March 1999 before Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FCCA5E5E7F2EBF2088256CD1005B853B/$file/9917551.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was on the briefs. Were on the brief for amicus curiae National Rifle Association of America. I Russell Nordyke and Sallie Nordyke (dba TS Trade Shows) ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec97/96-3556.man.html">UNITED STATES V. ROSS (12/19/1997, NO. 96-3556)<BR></A><BR> The Government persuaded the jury that Ross and Adams conspired to obtain money for their personal use and benefit from two financially troubled insurance companies by falsely representing that the loans were to be used solely for business purposes. Ross and Adams and their co conspirators created shell corporations and contrived deceptive paper transactions that had no economic substance.</P> <P> Ross and Adams contend that the evidence presented to the jury is insufficient to sustain a conviction. They assert that the district court miscalculated their sentence and applied a sentencing guideline that is unconstitutional. Under separate headings.</P> <P> We affirm the judgment of conviction because we conclude the evidence is sufficient to persuade a rational trier of fact of the guilt of the accused of each crime. We hold that the court's rulings on the admissibility of evidence and its decision to reject defense instructions were free from error.</P> <P> We vacate the sentence imposed on each defendant and remand for resentencing because the district court failed to make an independent finding that it was persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that Ross and Adams conspired to commit the offense of money laundering.</P> <P><CENTER>I</CENTER> </P> <P><CENTER>SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE</CENTER> </P> <P><CENTER>A. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="525"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19963556.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Government persuaded the jury that Ross and Adams conspired to obtain money for their personal use and benefit from two financially troubled insurance companies by falsely representing that the loans were to be used solely for business purposes. Ross and Adams contend that the evidence presented to the jury is insufficient to sustain a conviction. They assert that the district court miscalculated their sentence and applied a sentencing guideline that is unconstitutional. We affirm the judgment of conviction because we conclude the evidence is sufficient to persuade a rational trier of fact of the guilt of the accused of each crime. We hold that the court's rulings on the admissibility of evidence and its decision to reject defense instructions were free from error. We vacate the sentence imposed on each defendant and remand for resentencing because the district court failed to make an independent finding that it was persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that Ross and Adams conspired to commit the offense of money laundering. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-3073_032.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Disher was a customer of SSB. A neutral recommendation allegedly was a coded message from SSB to certain institutional customers to sell a security. The gravamen of the complaint was that SSB's misleading ratings induced Mr. Disher and class members to continue holding their securities in reliance on SSB's positive ratings when SSB's analysts no longer believed that such ratings were warranted. Disher defined the putative class to include himself and </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/801F57B52029863A88257020006E31AD/$file/0216019.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Prohibits United States citizens from investing in and trading with Iran.1 The question we face is whether an American citizen's guarantees of payments that furthered a trade agreement with an Iranian company are covered by the Executive Order and. Whether the guarantees are unenforceable as a result. We conclude that the guarantees were illegal under the Executive Order and. 059 is appended to this opinion in its entirety. All quotations in this account are from the complaint or the guarantees. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/962046.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The first issue is whether ERISA § 514(a). Against a third party who is neither a fiduciary nor a party in interest with respect to the plan. The second issue is whether ERISA § 502(a)(3). Whose interests are adverse to the interests of a pension plan subject to ERISA. The third issue is closely related to the second and asks whether ERISA § 502(a)(3) provides a cause of action for appropriate equitable relief against a nonfiduciary. I. Appellant Sheet Metal Workers' National Pension Fund (the Pension Fund) is a multi employer employee pension benefit plan. The Pension Fund is located in Alexandria. Inc. is an Iowa corporation engaged in the business of managing hotel properties and has its principal place of business in Cedar Rapids. Inc. were under the Holiday Inn flag. Inc. is wholly owned by two brothers. 000 in debt were offered to over 100 potential investors in 1988 through mid 1989 with the expectation of obtaining $40. Inc. was the limited partner in LHLP. Was the general partner in LHLP and initially owned the remaining one percent. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/044DE357BD726D7288256DF10063BDE4/$file/0255082.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs are legal and social service organizations and two individuals who seek to provide </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/07/973254P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Apfel has been appointed Commissioner of the Social Security Administration and is substituted as appellee. BACKGROUND Fines is sixty years old. He was employed for more than thirty years as a truck driver. He is unable to sit for more than thirty minutes. He was examined and tested by a psychologist. Who found that his I.Q. was in the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/08/98-5004.htm">98-5004 -- DANIELS V. APFEL -- 08/18/1998<BR></A><BR> Senior District Judge. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/03/962614P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Johnson's sole claim on appeal is that the vocational expert's testimony is insufficient to meet the Commissioner's burden of proof. and affirm. Johnson is thirty six years old and has had severe back problems ever since she was involved in a car accident in January 1992. causes of severe impairment. medical condition. stop working. Dizziness as further She has been examined by a variety of physicians who have come to a variety of different conclusions about her None of the physicians. Has advised her to Johnson's own remarks to her treating She has At least one physician has concluded that Johnson should not lift anything above thirty pounds. physicians about her headaches and dizziness are inconsistent. stated that her headaches and dizziness are severe enough to require missing work two days a week. United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. 2 2 Johnson is a single parent who lives with her eleven year old daughter in a two story duplex. The ALJ also found that Johnson is capable of performing jobs that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9DE3F8B107B2EBE888256E5A00707D04/$file/0015058.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Where they are examined by metal detectors and their possessions are x rayed. Globe argued that Dazo's state law claims were preempted by the Warsaw Convention. Holding that the theft occurred while Dazo was in the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/37773A844398187E88256AE20059E9CA/$file/0015058.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Where they are examined by metal detectors and their possessions are x rayed. Globe argued that Dazo's state law claims were preempted by the Warsaw Convention. Holding that the theft occurred while Dazo was in the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200602/04-5418b.pdf">O:\CIRCULATED OPINIONS\NLRB V. COOPER TIRE\FINAL OPINION.WPD<BR></A><BR> With him on the briefs were Nancy A. With him on the brief was Helene D. Circuit Judge: The threshold issue in this case is whether the United States District Court for the District of Columbia had jurisdiction to enforce subpoenas issued by the National Labor Relations Board ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/03a0337p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> By denying access to its property to persons who were employed at another facility owned by Petitioner. By maintaining a policy of denying off duty employees access to the outside non working areas of the facilities where they were employed. Because there is substantial evidence to support the Board's findings of fact. Because there are no errors of law1 in the decision. The dissent's contention that we failed to apply a de novo standa rd to the Board 's legal co nclusions is simply wrong. 1 September 22. A trial was held before Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/17F9DF6C163AFE378825734D0052D60D/$file/0515206.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court held that PlaintiffsAppellants were not entitled to judicial review of their claims that the TSA violated their First Amendment rights by disciplining and then discharging Gavello. Gavello was called to a manager's office and asked various questions about his union activities. He refused to respond and was subsequently placed on paid administrative leave while TSA management investigated whether he had engaged in union activities while on duty. Gavello mailed a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B0AD8289DCA49B6388256F15007570F9/$file/0350491.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He asserts that the district court should have suppressed the marijuana discovered during a border search of his vehicle because the invasive search of his vehicle's spare tire was obtained pursuant to an invalid border search. The vehicle was then referred to the secondary inspection area. Cortez was arrested as a result of this discovery. A two count indictment was filed in the Southern District of California. Asserting that it was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Cortez asserted that the cutting open of his spare tire was a non routine search that must be justified by particularized suspicion. Concluding that the cutting open of the spare tire was a routine border search that did not require reasonable suspicion. Cortez was sentenced to time served plus a two year period of supervised release. Jurisdiction and Standard of Review We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Required reasonable suspicion.1 Cortez contends that cutting open a spare tire without reasonable suspicion must be deemed constitutionally unreasonable because of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/97opinions/97-5293a.html">AMATEL JOSEPH V. HAWK, KATHLEEN<BR></A><BR> With him on the briefs <p> <p> <p> were <i>Frank W. With her <p> on the brief were <i>Ann M. Taylor</i> was on the brief for amici curiae National <p> Coalition for the Protection of Children &. The statute is not enforced directly. Ruled that it <p> was facially invalid as a violation of the First Amendment and <p> enjoined its enforcement. Federal regulations authorized prison wardens <p> to reject a publication </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200707/06-1197a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With them on the briefs were Rheba Rutkowski. With him on the brief were Peter D. Chief Judge: Petitioners are eight men detained at the Naval Station at Guantánamo Bay. Each petitioner seeks review of the determination by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT or Tribunal) that he is an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/EB0D5F33F83FEA1B88256FB10079DE81/$file/0316556.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. I The CNMI is a commonwealth government comprised of sixteen islands in the West Pacific.1 Through a Covenant agreement with the United States. The CNMI is under the sovereignty of the United States but retains the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/041654np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ahearn was a participant in three separate retirement plans: the U.S. Only the SERP is at issue here. That the benefits he was (and is) entitled to receive were improperly computed. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. A. SERP Social Security Offset The SERP is a so called </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/37773a844398187e88256ae20059e9ca/$FILE/0015058.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Where they are examined by metal detectors and their possessions are x rayed. Globe argued that Dazo's state law claims were preempted by the Warsaw Convention. Holding that the theft occurred while Dazo was in the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2001/995940.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Mathis asserts that the District Court erred in admitting evidence that his picture was selected from a photographic array. Because the array was unconstitutionally suggestive. When the three were inside the bank. The prosecution's primary witnesses were Sergeant Gary Gubbei and one of Mr. Three men exited the Jeep while it was still moving the driver first. Sergeant 3 Gubbei testified at trial that he was able. The robbed banks were located near Camden. Seaberry jumped over the tellers' counters and placed money from the drawers in a bag they were carrying. The three men exited while the vehicle was still rolling forward. Or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. The disputed evidence was admissible. Mathis conceded that Rule 404(b) was satisfied. Gantt's testimony presented a risk of unfair prejudice that substantially outweighed its probative value and was therefore barred by Rule 403. Evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DD65BA6BBD0CC48B88256A4F005B6B5F/$file/9971317.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We hold that organizational activity is not necessary for the union's performance of its duties as the exclusive representative of the employees. To require non member employees to fund such activity is not authorized by section 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act (the NLRA). To have violated section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) of the NLRA. By informing new employees that they were required as a condition of employment to become full members of Local 1036. We hold that Local 1036 did violate section 8(b)(1)(A) but that the Board's remedial order is too broad. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS It is uncontested that the petitioners. Are non members of the union who objected to paying fees for the organizing activities of the UFCW. Management was willing to negotiate. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-4084.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Vincent Lane was charged with one count of bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 and eight counts of making false statements to a bank in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014. The jury was unable to reach a verdict on the remaining three counts. Which were then dismissed. Lane was sentenced to 30 months in prison. I. Background Vincent Lane is a real estate developer who participated in several ventures during the 1980s and 1990s in both Illinois and in Texas. From 1988 through 1995 he was also the chairman of the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA). Lane's conviction is based on fraudulent statements concerning his financial stability made to bank officials at American National Bank ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-7064.html">REZI P. FORSHEY V. ANTHONY PRINCIPI<BR></A><BR> For respondent appellee.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-9520.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction to review. While the security officers are in charge of policing the slot area. Each type of employee receives tips from customers and are required by casino policy to share these tips. The manner for sharing tips between slot technicians and security officers is the foundation of the dispute leading to this proceeding. All tips were pooled with half the tips going to slot technicians and the other half to security officers. A slot technician's share of the tip pool was smaller than a security officer's share. Tips were not first divided between the different groups of employees. One technician was fired and two others were suspended. The ALJ held that the employees who were (1) In its reply brief. See 29 U.S.C. 157 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A4C55ED2F6EDDFFB88256AA300831C54/$file/9935787.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Vertigan contends that there was no substantial evidence on the record as a whole to support the Administrative Law Judge's ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Oct2003/031332u.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> At issue is whether the Commissioner's decision is supported by substantial evidence. 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g). Because we conclude that decision is supported by substantial evidence. Alleging that she was disabled by a pain disorder. She was 41 years old. The ALJ found that the record as a whole did not establish that Morris was disabled. Which were severe but which did not meet the criteria for any impairment listings of the Social Security Administration regulations impairment listings because she was not sufficiently restricted in the activities of daily living and social functioning. She was limited in. The ALJ found that M orris did not have residual function capacity to 2 perform her past relevant work as a babysitter. The ALJ found that Morris did have the capacity to perform other jobs in the national economy. The ALJ also found that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/05/932267P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The church under 11 U.S.C. were not avoidable Minn. 1992). Minn. 1993). § 548(a)(2) because the contributions were not made in exchange for less than </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/022416.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. We conclude that the evidence was insufficient to establish that Bhella was subjected to an objectively hostile work environment. A. Surjit Bhella was born in India. Bhella was hired in January 1989 as a civilian employee at the Naval Consolidated Brig that was then under construction in Charleston. Bhella conducted surveys among the prisoners while they were housed at the Brig and after they were released. No one was performing that function at the Brig. The Brig is headed by a Commanding Officer ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/08/953500P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The order of the Board is reported at 319 N.L.R.B. 10 (1995). Golden Eagle is engaged in spotting and supervising the loading of beer products on distributor and common carrier trailers. The Brewery Drivers and Helpers Local Union 133 (union) was certified as the exclusive collective bargaining representative for Golden Eagle's spotting/drivers and loading employees. 2 Riesenbeck said the language was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/08/036014P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue in these appeals is the scope of bankruptcy court jurisdiction. Was executed by Debtor and Safeco. Was renewable for four additional one year periods unless Safeco gave ninety days notice of its intent to cancel or not to renew. The ADM bond further provided: It is understood and agreed that [ADM] may recover the full amount of the Bond (less any previous amounts paid to [ADM] under the Bond) if [Safeco] cancels or nonrenews the Bond and. Because Debtor was now in bankruptcy. The agreement reflected in the Term Sheet was a post petition security credit agreement that required bankruptcy court approval. 3 In late July and early August. Although the new arrangements were later approved by the bankruptcy court. The ADM bond is in full force and effect. There have never been any claims against it. Safeco's original complaint sought a declaratory judgment determining that ADM was not entitled to forfeiture of the penal sum of five million dollars and an injunction preventing ADM from continuing to demand payment. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200117176op2.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The five defendants were arrested. Were The defendants raised the following additional issues on appeal: prosecutorial misconduct regarding the testimony of a government witness and during closing argument. Guerrero were also charged with conspiring to deliver to Cuba </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/962164.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Published opinion filed 5/13/98 is vacated. As the event's organizers were beginning plans for the motorcycle rally. Captain Doug Horton of the SDPS was informed that organizers expected up to 3500 participants. Sought Horton out and advised him that an unidentified friend at work had told McKinney that an unidentified person had reported to McKinney's friend that a confrontation at the Rally between the Hell's Angel and Pagan gangs was planned. Horton was further advised that gang members could not be visually identified because it was planned that they would </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7BFE333E5AF0E7C888256E5A00707B4F/$file/9971317.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We hold that organizational activity is not necessary for the union's performance of its duties as the exclusive representative of the employees. To require non member employees to fund such activity is not authorized by section 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act (the NLRA). To have violated section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2) of the NLRA. By informing new employees that they were required as a condition of employment to become full members of Local 1036. We hold that Local 1036 did violate section 8(b)(1)(A) but that the Board's remedial order is too broad. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS It is uncontested that the petitioners. Are non members of the union who objected to paying fees for the organizing activities of the UFCW. Management was willing to negotiate. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199809/97-5293a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Frank W. With her on the brief were Ann M. Taylor was on the brief for amici curiae National Coalition for the Protection of Children & Families. The statute is not enforced directly. Ruled that it was facially invalid as a violation of the First Amendment and enjoined its enforcement. Federal regulations authorized prison wardens to reject a publication </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr99/96-3021.man.html">BLACKFEET NAT'L BANK V. NELSON (4/5/1999, NO. 96-3021)<BR></A><BR> Seeking a declaratory judgment that its sale of the Retirement CD was authorized by the National Bank Act (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr96/95-6781.opa.html">NATIONAL COAL ASSOC. V. CHATER<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>National Coal Assoc. v. The sole issue in this appeal is the meaning of the word </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199903/98-3094a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Brendan V. With him on the brief were David M. The only question we must decide is whether we have jurisdiction to hear the appeal despite its interlocutory nature. One of the immediate tasks facing any newly elected President is to begin forming a Cabinet. The FBI would have two principal objectives in conducting its investigations. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/12/01-4130.htm">01-4130 -- OLSEN V. LAYTON HILLS MALL -- 12/11/2002<BR></A><BR> The appeal was timely under Rule 4. Although the Visa card was valid and had not expired. Appellant was unaware that his mother Donna Olsen had asked for a new card to be issued because of prior billing concerns. Discover Card informed her that Appellant was using the card fraudulently and that she should confiscate it. Who advised her that he would return with a personal check to pay for the purchases. <p> While Appellant was en route from the Layton Hills Mall to his home and back again. Appellant was charged with fraudulent use of a financial transaction card. To verify that the card was not fraudulent. Reasoning that he would be unable to determine whether the voices on the other end of the line were indeed Appellant's parents. Allow </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200306/02-5307a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/021FA522EA6FF8C388257346004A575C/$file/0555269.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Whether or not the stock was initially issued to compensate bona fide consulting services. Phan was involved in its subsequent resale to raise capital for the company and thereby violated the registration provision of federal securities law. Phan was chairman. As was true of many other companies venturing into the technology sector in the late 1990s. The Fee Agreement specified that Wu </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0A7C548F2BF1F0D0882571B60052F146/$file/0436006.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Stout contends the Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr99/96-3021.man.html">BLACKFEET NAT'L BANK V. NELSON (4/5/1999, NO. 96-3021)<BR></A><BR> Seeking a declaratory judgment that its sale of the Retirement CD was authorized by the National Bank Act (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr96/95-6781.opa.html">NATIONAL COAL ASSOC. V. CHATER<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>National Coal Assoc. v. The sole issue in this appeal is the meaning of the word </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jan1995/94a0936p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> On appeal we consider three questions: (1) whether Reschini's appeal is moot. (3) if jurisdiction in the district court is not precluded. Whether dismissal of this suit was nevertheless required on the ground that the complaint failed to state a cognizable cause of action. Depositors in a federally chartered mutual savings association are. [fn1] notwithstanding that the proprietary interest of a depositor member in a mutual savings association is a chimera. It is ownership in name only. A special meeting of Association members was held. The conversion plan was approved by the members. The proposed conversion was pending before the OTS but had not yet been approved. Or set aside the order of the OTS Director approving the proposed conversion.[fn3] We are. At pains to point out that the petition for review ž an invocation of this court's appellate authority with respect to certain decisions of the OTS Director ž has not yet been briefed and argued and is not the subject of this opinion. We address the contention of the Association and France that this appeal is moot because the special meeting that Reschini sought to enjoin has already occurred and the Association has already converted to a Pennsylvania chartered savings bank. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/08/03-3287.htm">03-3287 -- U.S. V. WESTOVER -- 08/11/2004<BR></A><BR> District Judge.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/194CF1FDFA83CF1488256E5A00707C41/$file/9935787.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Vertigan contends that there was no substantial evidence on the record as a whole to support the Administrative Law Judge's ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/jan96/95-5086.html">ANIXTER V. HOME-STAKE PROD. CO.<BR></A><BR> 1996 by Judge Lucero Please be advised that the attached dissent was omitted from the decision as filed January 29. We are told. Investments made in later year Programs were paid to earlier year investors as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="517"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A1BC4AC7A3CC2CE58825728900823407/$file/0455838.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: We are asked to determine whether and if so. Under what circumstances a criminal defendant's retirement benefits are available as a source of funds to compensate crime victims. Underlying each statute is a weighty policy determination: MVRA rests on the recognition that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="512"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/034220p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs are persons who borrowed from the two banks and signed second mortgages. Appellees in this case are the settling parties. Appellants are a number of law firms and plaintiff class members who challenge the District Court's jurisdiction. The alleged mastermind of the scheme was the Shumway Organization ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="512"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/991319.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We reverse this decision and uphold the constitutionality of Regulation 61 12 because (1) the Regulation serves a valid state interest and is little more than a codification of national medical and abortion association recommendations designed to ensure the health and appropriate care of women seeking abortions. Are even yet modest and have not been shown to burden the ability of a woman to make the decision to have an abortion. (4) abortion clinics may rationally be regulated as a class while other clinics or medical practices are not. South Carolina regulated clinics at which secondtrimester abortions were performed. The South Carolina legislature amended its statute to require any </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="512"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/03a0366p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Cavin was employed by Honda from 1991 until 1999. If the need for leave is unforeseeable. Honda will strive to help the employee improve his attendance through a progressivecounseling system designed to ensure that employees understand the attendance policy. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="510"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0401p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Walton was hired as an hourly assembler at the Milan Plant on October 5. A position he held until his employment was terminated in May 2001. A millwright is a skilled tradesman responsible for moving and assembling office furniture. Walton was also a member of Local 33. That he had twisted his knee the day before and that he intended to visit the medical department to have his knee evaluated. The entry indicates that the reason for Walton's absence was that he was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="510"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/06/99-5041.htm">99-5041 -- COOK V. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION -- 06/22/1999<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Claimant Lewis Aaron Cook appeals from an order of the magistrate judge<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="510"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19949025.OPA.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> To which this case was removed from state court. The case was removable under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) (1994). 1 I. The contract was On later extended for another year. The case was converted into a Chapter 7 liquidation and a trustee was appointed. Before the settlement was approved. The case was subsequently removed to the district court. The court did not allow Thomson to recoup the value of shipments that were lost after January 3. 595.82 claim to take into account discounts that Brown had awarded Thomson and unpaid shipping invoices that were issued outside of the statute of limitations period. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="510"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/012021.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Section 1 the status is changed from </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0489n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is a 66 year old woman with significant physical and mental impairments. When she was last employed. When her </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0351p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The question that the parties have raised and briefed in this case is whether the plaintiffs' amended complaint ­ which. Asserts exclusively state law causes of action ­ is preempted in whole or in part by the Labor Management Relations Act. The district court held that two claims in plaintiffs' amended complaint were pre empted. It held that the other two claims were not pre empted by federal law. Arguing that all of the plaintiffs' claims are pre empted by federal law. All of the claims are untimely under the federal statute of limitations. Page 2 We affirm the district court insofar as it held that the two challenged claims in the plaintiffs' amended complaint were not completely preempted. We conclude that none of the claims in the plaintiffs' original complaint were completely preempted by the Labor Management Relations Act. That means that removal jurisdiction in federal court was lacking from the outset of this case. We further conclude that we are obligated to act on this jurisdictional defect in the earlier proceedings. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2CE960676BCF075588256E5A00707CAE/$file/9917040.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal from the district court's final judgment. Was an employee owned garbage company. 12634 Plaintiffs are former employee shareholders (or their heirs and assigns) of Norcal. There is no dispute that the ESOP is an employee benefit plan within the meaning of ERISA. Forty four of the Plaintiffs also were Norcal employees and participants in the benefit plan ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-5033a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Wilma A. Attorney at the time the briefs were filed. ' of its withholdings may have been inappropriate.... 27 n.1 (1998): A </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1745550937F817BB88256ABF007BE07E/$file/9917040.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal from the district court's final judgment. Was an employee owned garbage company. 12634 Plaintiffs are former employee shareholders (or their heirs and assigns) of Norcal. There is no dispute that the ESOP is an employee benefit plan within the meaning of ERISA. Forty four of the Plaintiffs also were Norcal employees and participants in the benefit plan ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200311975.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from a district court order denying the bondholder plaintiffs' motion to certify a class action and dismissing their complaint without prejudice on the grounds that they. Their case is not yet ripe. Of the dismissal. 2 1 issue was governed by a trust indenture.2 The bondholders were the intended third party beneficiaries of the trust indenture. A master trustee was appointed to oversee the transaction and collect payments as they became due. 1998.3 It is alleged that. It claims that it was unaware that the bondholders' perfected security interest had lapsed. S. Bank The security interest was perfected when the original UCC 1 financing statement was filed on December 22. It was effective for a five year period. Within six months prior to the expiration of the five year period beginning on the date the original financing statement was filed. The UCC 3 was due to be filed anytime from June 22. This was considered an event of default under Section 801 of the bond trust indenture. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Oct2000/991576.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Defendants are the Pennsylvania Department of Education ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200201/00-1523a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Avakian was on the brief for amici curiae Associated Builders and Contractors. With him on the brief were Arthur F. With him on the brief was Richard P. Tradesmen argues in part that its refusal to hire Oakes did not violate the Act because Oakes's activity before the Lorain Board of Building Standards and Appeals was not protected activity. Of particular significance to this case is the ordinance's definition of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200702/06-5126a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Peter D. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. With him on the brief were Susan L. Circuit Judge: In this case we have before us a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed on behalf of Shawqi Ahmad Omar. He traveled to Iraq seeking reconstruction related work and would have left by November 2004 but for his arrest and detention. The government believes that Omar was part of Zarqawi's network and that he facilitated terrorist activities both in and outside of Iraq. The government alleges that four Jordanian foreign fighters and an Iraqi insurgent were captured along with Omar. That weapons and improvised explosive device making materials were found in his home. The panel also found that Omar was not a prisoner of war for purposes of the Third Geneva Convention. American MNF I officials have held Omar at various detention facilities in Iraq. The record indicates neither who made this decision nor what procedures were followed. The government also argues that even if the district court does have jurisdiction. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0709n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Brewster contends that the Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTA1NzAtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-0570-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is VACATED and REMANDED. Is DISMISSED. An NSL is an administrative subpoena that allows the FBI to gain access to. 1 when this information is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200702/05-1216a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Judith A. With her on the brief were Ronald E. Young was on the brief for intervenor Guardsmark. Where an employer promulgates work rules </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/08/974090P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ALJ Johnson ruled that Steahr was not disabled and denied benefits. ALJ Ingrassia found that jobs existed in significant numbers in the national economy which Steahr was capable of performing. Steahr contends that ALJ Johnson's determination that she could not perform her past relevant work was binding on ALJ Ingrassia on remand. Our application of the law of the case doctrine is guided by our decision in Brachtel v. That the law of the case doctrine was accordingly inapplicable. The District Court necessarily rejected the argument that the ALJ was compelled by its previous order to find that Brachtel needed to lie down throughout the day. We will defer to the District Court's construction of its own order. This language makes clear that the district court is best able to determine whether its mandate has been violated by an ALJ on remand. That we will defer to the district court's interpretation of its own remand order. 273 (8th Cir. 1988) (suggesting that district court is best poised to determine whether its remand order has been violated). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2C667A355EA2645D8825715D007EC2C3/$file/0250355o.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Denying the petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc is amended as follows: After the sentence. AFSHARI Fisher and Judge Berzon were recused from all proceedings in this case. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug97/93-3291.ma3.html">UNITED STATES V. GECAS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. Is a Lithuanian national who has lived in the United States as a resident alien for thirty four years. Claiming that his silence is protected by the constitutional privilege against self incrimination. Held that Gecas was entitled to the equitable relief provided by the privilege because he had a real and substantial fear of conviction under foreign law.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-5033a.html">ELLEN W. SCHRECKER V. DEPT. OF JUSTICE<BR></A><BR> With him on the briefs were Wilma A. Attorney at the time the briefs were filed. ' of its withholdings may have been inappropriate....<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/487AE14C5D6C4C8C882571530057D1CB/$file/0250355o.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> AFSHARI The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. Money is fungible. Giving money to a political organization that is not engaged in terrorist activities is constitutionally protected. The determination of whether or not an organization is engaged in terrorism is therefore crucial. Because it distinguishes activities that can be criminalized from those that are protected by the First Amendment. This case concerns the manner in which this distinction is drawn. The net result is that Rahmani is being criminally prosecuted. Almost certainly will be convicted. For contributing to an organization that has been designated as terrorist with none of the protections that are constitutionally UNITED STATES v. Rahmani will in all likelihood spend many years in prison for contributing to an organization whose designation the D.C. Or attempts or conspires to do so </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug97/93-3291.ma3.html">UNITED STATES V. GECAS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. Is a Lithuanian national who has lived in the United States as a resident alien for thirty four years. Claiming that his silence is protected by the constitutional privilege against self incrimination. Held that Gecas was entitled to the equitable relief provided by the privilege because he had a real and substantial fear of conviction under foreign law.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199801/97-5033a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Jennifer M. With him on the brief were Mary Lou Leary. The Linders seek to prove that defendants were the leaders of the contra organizations. Agreeing with the agency that the Linders' request was unduly burdensome. The Linders demanded documents concerning the attack in which Linder was killed and defendants' role in it. Finding that the agencies had made </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1523a.html">TRADESMEN INTERNATIONAL, INC., V. NLRB<BR></A><BR> Avakian was on the brief for amici curiae Associated Builders and Contractors. Argued the cause for respondent.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/383449778AF3EEC688256DA3007C140B/$file/0335096.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: The question we must answer is whether the United States can remove aliens to Somalia. A country that does not have a functioning government to accept them. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. The INS was abolished and its functions transferred to the newly created Department of Homeland Security. Sought an order enjoining the INS from removing them to Somalia because there is no government in Somalia to accept them. Petitioners also sought certification of a nationwide habeas and declaratory class composed of all persons in the United States who are subject to orders of removal to Somalia. BACKGROUND There are four named petitioners on appeal: Yusuf Ali Ali. All four were ordered removed from the United States on various dates in 2000 and 2001. Each had been released from INS custody because removal to Somalia </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/02opinions/02-5034.html">MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION V. U.S.<BR></A><BR> For plaintiff appellant McDonnell Douglas Corporation.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>With him on the brief was <u>Elizabeth A. Ferrell</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Of counsel on the brief was <u>John W. Argued for plaintiff appellent General Dynamics Corporation.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>With him on the brief were <u>David A. Perrelli</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar2001/995734.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because we conclude that the claims are not preempted. We will reverse their dismissal and remand this case to the District Court. I. FACTS1 The plaintiffs are shareholders in seven investment companies. The plaintiffs have brought the case as a putative class action. The Funds are closed end investment companies. Which are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and publicly traded on the New Y ork Stock Exchange. All of the Funds are incorporated under the laws of Maryland and have their principal places of business in Plainsboro. The Funds' aim is to provide shareholders with income that is exempt from federal income taxes and to increase retur n to shareholders through the use of leverage. Because the facts of this case are not in dispute. The factual background that follows is taken largely from an earlier District Court opinion in this case. As long as there is a spr ead between the short term rates paid by the Funds to holders of the preferred stock and the longer ter m rates received by the Funds from investments. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/12/023854P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lewis stated that she was unable to work because of a variety of impairments. A hearing was held before an administrative law judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0135p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Foremost among the issues we must decide in this appeal is whether the inclusion of stock purchase warrants along with a promissory note given in consideration of a loan renders the transaction subject to federal and Tennessee securities laws. The loans were intended to serve as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/053420np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The District Court determined that the Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. I. Factual Background and Procedural History Izzo was diagnosed with Lyme disease in April 1995. Izzo was prescribed intravenous treatment on January 16. Who opined that Izzo's prognosis was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0096p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The ALJ ultimately concluded that Bowen was not entitled to disability benefits because he retained a sufficient residual functional capacity (RFC) to work. Comm'r of Social Security Page 2 Bowen was. Factual background Bowen is presently 50 years old. Is married with two children. He was able to continue working. We will therefore limit our discussion to the facts relevant to that determination. Bowen was first admitted to the Mountain Comprehensive Care Center (MCCC) in eastern Kentucky in July of 1999. He was referred to the mental health unit for symptoms that included depression. The vast majority of these notes and examination records are signed by both Dr. Holean was Bowen's treating psychologist at MCCC. Bowen was also treated by Dr. Most relevant to this appeal are the opinions of Drs. Cohen noted paradoxically and without further explanation that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTUwOTctY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5097-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That Murray and Gould had never actually worked for him and that they were threats to national security. We will continue to refer to the INS. 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 BACKGROUND In 1998. Who are responsible for general oversight and enforcement of the IPPCTP provisions. The PA is responsible for monitoring participants' compliance with program requirements. The PA is required to terminate from the program Id. § 139.4. NGIT was selected as the any participant who is fired for cause. The PA is obligated to report to the DOS and INS on certain aspects of the program. After they were approved to participate in the IPPCTP. They began to have concerns about Smith's conduct. did not pay them and told them that business was too slow. That both of them were working for many different employers. That Murray was getting his pilot's license. That they were both working for others in the Las Vegas area. That Murray was getting his pilot's license in order to open a business in Yemen. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/11/02-5061.htm">02-5061 -- VAIL V. BARNHART -- 11/26/2003<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff appellant Albert Vail appeals from an order of the district court affirming the Social Security Administration's decision denying his application for Social Security disability and Supplemental Security Income benefits (SSI). This is Vail's second application for benefits as he seeks to be reevaluated in the course of degenerative diseases affecting his back and limbs. We have jurisdiction over this appeal under 42 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200702/05-5447a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was John Kenneth Zwerling. With him on the brief was Peter D. The government concluded that the organization was a branch office of a Specially Designated Global Terrorist and invoked its authority under anti terrorism laws to block IARA USA assets. IARA USA also argues that it should have been permitted to amend its complaint to request access to its blocked funds for payment of attorneys' fees. Because we conclude that the designation was supported by the record and was not contrary to law. The designation was based on OFAC's conclusion that IARA </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/10/96-4171.htm">96-4171 -- U.S. V. HUTCHINGS -- 10/21/1997<BR></A><BR> Were each sentenced to forty months imprisonment and a five year supervised release. Who was under the command of Utah National Guard Lt. The entry lasted less than one minute and nothing was seized from the trailer at that time. Sergeant Egbert aided the others in removing the plants performing what is known as a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2003/022123u.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2002). We will affirm in part. Although our review of the District Court's order granting summary judgment and its interpretation of legal issues is plenary. We must uphold the Commissioner's findings unless we conclude that they were not supported by </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/02opinions/02-7019.html">SYBLE M. VAUGHN V. PRINCIPI<BR></A><BR> With him on the brief were <u>Robert D. Attorney.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Of counsel on the brief were <u>Donald E. Et al.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>With her on the brief was <u>Brian Wolfman</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Also on the brief were <u>Barton F. 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (2000).<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>The Veterans Court denied their applications on the ground that neither was a prevailing party. <span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span><em><u><span style='color:black. The Board of Veteran s Appeals (BVA) denied her claims.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Vaughn appealed the denial to the Veterans Court.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>While her appeal was pending. Unless the court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class=MsoBodyText2 style='margin top:0in. </o:p></span></span></p> <p class=MsoBodyText2 style='text indent:0in'><span class=BlockTextChar><span style='mso bidi font family: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-2121.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: Amend the cover sheet as follows: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan98/94-8667.man.html">FLOYD V. WAITERS (1/20/1998, NO. 94-8667)<BR></A><BR> Title IX</P> <P> Plaintiffs contend that they were the victims of intentional discrimination based on the sexual harassment by Booker in violation of Title IX. ... be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.... </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200701/05-7162a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Robert J. With her on the brief were Michael D. Exxon argues that the district court should have granted the motion to dismiss because the plaintiffs' claims are non justiciable political questions. We need not reach the merits of Exxon's arguments because we do not have jurisdiction over this appeal. We deny this petition because Exxon has not established a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan98/94-8667.man.html">FLOYD V. WAITERS (1/20/1998, NO. 94-8667)<BR></A><BR> Title IX</P> <P> Plaintiffs contend that they were the victims of intentional discrimination based on the sexual harassment by Booker in violation of Title IX. ... be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.... </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/01/051315P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The ALJ found that Swope was not entitled to a period of disability insurance benefits nor eligible for Supplemental Security Income under the Social Security Act. The first two were denied at the administrative level. No appeal was taken. His claim was denied at each administrative proceeding. The evidence presented to the ALJ established that Swope was initially employed in 1985. 000 a year until he was injured on the job in 1995. Swope's earnings were sharply reduced due to reasons that he attributes to his injury. Testified that there were several jobs in the national and local economies that Swope could perform. The ALJ determined that Swope's contentions that he was disabled because of pain were not credible because: (1) they were not supported by medical. (3) Swope's credibility with respect to the degree of pain he incurs was further diminished by his daily activities. Who have 2 recommended only exercise and weight loss. (5) Swope's testimony that he had fallen six times because of his disability was not supported by the record. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021639.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That six metric tons2 of surplus plutonium will be transferred from Rocky Flats to SRS for long term storage. That it had failed to comply with NEPA procedures prior Plutonium is a highly radioactive. Pits) at the core of modern nuclear weapons are largely composed (at least 93%) of a particular type of plutonium Plutonium 239. We will review the pertinent facts and legal principles governing the NEPA issues presented.5 II. When these requests were denied. 2002. 5 Certain national and local media were Parties in Interest in the district court. That ruling is not at issue in this appeal. That ruling is also not before us. 3 6 HODGES v. Unilaterally announced that a total of 38.2 metric tons of our plutonium was no longer necessary for defense purposes. The use of the terms </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021740.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are referring to it as modified. 2 The Act is codified at 29 U.S.C. §§ 151 169. § 8(a)(1) is codified at 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1). 1 ANHEUSER BUSCH. Certain of Busch's employees are represented by the Brewery Conference of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. The charges were consolidated into a complaint against Busch (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5F75A1F3AE9A0A9688256E5A00707DA0/$file/0035181.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended by adding a new footnote 3. As follows: We need not decide whether good cause is required for submission of new evidence to the Appeals Council. As Mayes conceded in her briefs that good cause was indeed required. Mayes belatedly argues that good cause is required only when new evidence is submitted to a district court. Ramirez does not address whether submissions to the Appeals Council are or are not subject to the good cause requirement. All subsequent footnotes are renumbered accordingly. The petition for panel rehearing is denied. 17157 OPINION MOLLWAY. He would have discovered her herniated discs. The ALJ would then have found her disabled and therefore eligible to receive disability insurance benefits. Mayes therefore asks this court to reverse the district court's affirmance of the ALJ's decision and to remand the case to the ALJ for further consideration of whether she is disabled in light of her herniated discs. We affirm the ALJ's determination that Mayes was not disabled. We find that this </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/638928EF249D934C88256E5A00707C77/$file/0035181.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He would have discovered her herniated discs. The ALJ would then have found her disabled and therefore eligible to receive disability insurance benefits. Mayes therefore asks this court to reverse the district court's affirmance of the ALJ's decision and to remand the case to the ALJ for further consideration of whether she is disabled in light of her herniated discs. We affirm the ALJ's determination that Mayes was not disabled. We find that this </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/01/971566P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was successful at using the float on the checks to appear to have a balanced account through the assistance of a Credit Union insider who processed Johnson's checks through the check clearinghouse system rather than as same day funds.1 As By sending the checks through the clearinghouse system. Johnson's accounts were given credit for the deposit of the checks on the day he deposited them. Johnson avoided detection that his account was overdrawn by appearing to have a positive balance at the end of each month. Although it was not filed in the office of the Minnesota Secretary of State. The retainer agreement provides: 5 We have discussed the retainer necessary for us to undertake your representation. We have requested and you have agreed to pay us a non refundable retainer of $72. Roach told Fabel he was interested in negotiating with Johnson to recover the assets because. At that meeting it was confirmed that the NCUAB was not aware of any written loan agreement or other formal security agreement covering the majority of Johnson's assets. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/07/00-3214.htm">00-3214 -- PARKS V. AHAMMED -- 07/03/2002<BR></A><BR> Was a licensed securities broker dealer registered with the Securities Exchange Commission and a member of SIPC.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/03/03-30403.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The ALJ found that Haas was not disabled. That there are a significant number of Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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. Because we find that the proper legal standards were used to evaluate the evidence and the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence in the record. Social These Disability benefits November 1999. applications were denied. Haas asserted that he was first bothered by symptoms on that date but did not become unable to work until January 1999. Haas stated that he stopped working due to severe back pain and neck impairments and that he had undergone three back surgeries and suffered from degenerative disk disorder and osteoporosis. prior work experience was in the construction business: Haas's as an electrician helper. In October 1999 Haas was examined by Dr. Rathmell's overall impression was that Haas had depression secondary to his medical problems and that he was anxious with a short attention span. receive therapy on an outpatient basis. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/849C8721950AF06288256AB4006DB400/$file/0035181.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He would have discovered her herniated discs. The ALJ would then have found her disabled and therefore eligible to receive disability insurance benefits. Mayes therefore asks this court to reverse the district court's affirmance of the ALJ's decision and to remand the case to the ALJ for further consideration of whether she is disabled in light of her herniated discs. We affirm the ALJ's determination that Mayes was not disabled. We find that this </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/89905E37452D8DDD88256E5A00707D2E/$file/9915614.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Insurers allege that MERLO is preempted by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response. Health & Safety ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/May2003/0138052.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> MD 21201 Amicus Law Professors in support of Appellant *** Joining Professor Lipson on the brief are Professors Ralph Brubaker. Introduction This is an appeal from an Order of the District Court. The question on appeal is whether the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Hartford Underwriters Ins. While the question in Hartford Underwriters was one of a nontrustee's right unilaterally to circumvent the Code's remedial scheme. Our conclusion is consistent with the received wisdom that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8D9B522DE32A804C88256B3B0000C4AB/$file/9915614.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2001 is amended as follows: 1) The opinion's list of counsel for the defendantsappellees. The first three sentences of the first full paragraph should be replaced by the following: 235 </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0300n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm the district court's order of dismissal. Others were members of Glencoe. Which is a corporate affiliate of defendant MLBFS. The value in Freibert's brokerage account by then was over $900. Freibert was not notified of this transaction and did not learn of it until March 2003. The plaintiff was not aware of this transaction. Which was engineered by Coe. Believing it was related to the 1997 pledge agreement and the earlier Glencoe loan. He alleges that he was unaware that he had just signed a new financial assets security agreement in favor of the defendant. Was arranged by Coe without the plaintiff's knowledge. The rights of MLBFS hereunder and with respect to the Collateral are absolute and unconditional. The 1999 pledge agreement was to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Oct2003/031205u.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm. We recount the facts and the procedural history of the case only as they are relevant to the following discussion. That application was denied by an ALJ in 1996. Holiday asked that his prior ruling be reopened because </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/02/02-7077.htm">02-7077 -- LOCAL 514 TRANSPORT WORKER UNION OF AMERICA V. KEATING -- 02/13/2004<BR></A><BR> 1A of the Oklahoma Constitution were preempted by federal law and that any remaining non preempted provision was not severable from the preempted provisions. 1A that were preempted by federal labor law were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3451_054.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This appeal presents another variation on the question whether taxpayers have standing to challenge a governmental action that allegedly violates the Establishment Clause an issue that arises with some regularity. Each of these cases addresses challenging issues in an area of law in which the law is by no means clear. The taxpayers' target is a federal statute. Plaintiff Eugene Winkler and others (to whom we refer collectively as Winkler) sued the Secretary of Defense claiming that the Jamboree statute violates the Establishment Clause because it requires the government to support an organization BSA that conditions membership upon a belief in God and thus that excludes believers in religions that are not based on one or more Deities. The district court ruled that standing was proper. It then found that BSA is a religious organization and that the direct public subsidy of the Jamborees violated the Establishment Clause. We conclude that Winkler does not have standing to challenge the Jamboree statute. There are three elements of Article III standing: injury in fact. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/07/002772P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2). I. Vicki Banks was born on July 30. She has been blind in her left eye since she was involved in an auto accident as a baby. Which was successfully treated. She was enrolled in special education classes throughout her schooling. She was laid off from that job on April 30. Banks told one psychologist that she was laid off because of her drug use. The opioid dependance is now in remission. Which was diagnosed as mild carpel tunnel syndrome (CTS) on October 8. To whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 2 3 any activity because of that diagnosis. It is unclear from the record how long Banks took Propranolol for her headaches. She was apparently taking it in January 1997. She listed it as a medication she was currently taking when she completed her application for hearing dated June 13. Which sometimes alleviated her pain.4 Banks sought psychiatric treatment for depression between January and April 1997 and was placed on antidepressants in February 1997. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B09FA7717F18D78588256AF50001E5AF/$file/9915614.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Insurers allege that MERLO is preempted by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response. Health & Safety ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/oct97/96-4171.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. HUTCHINGS<BR></A><BR> Were each sentenced to forty months imprisonment and a five year supervised release. Who was under the command of Utah National Guard Lt. The entry lasted less than one minute and nothing was seized from the trailer at that time. Sergeant Egbert aided the others in removing the plants performing what is known as a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B78F684FD02875F2882570F1007AE6EA/$file/0435526.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Our challenge is to cut through the dense language to figure out what Congress meant in terms of surviving spouse benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/nov96/96-5057.wpd.html">BERNA V. CHATER<BR></A><BR> The functions of the Secretary of Health and Human Services in social security cases were transferred to the Commissioner of Social Security. Was substituted for Donna E. In the text we continue to refer to the Secretary because she was the appropriate party at the time of the underlying decision. (2) Honorable John W. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. (2) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(1). Plaintiff's sole argument on appeal is that the ALJ deviated from proper step four procedure by relying entirely on the expert's conclusory opinion that she could return to prior work. The rigor of our review in social security matters is captured in the familiar formulation that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3154DD61D9F508B788256B2900637AEB/$file/0035181.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended by adding a new footnote 3. As follows: We need not decide whether good cause is required for submission of new evidence to the Appeals Council. As Mayes conceded in her briefs that good cause was indeed required. Mayes belatedly argues that good cause is required only when new evidence is submitted to a district court. Ramirez does not address whether submissions to the Appeals Council are or are not subject to the good cause requirement. All subsequent footnotes are renumbered accordingly. The petition for panel rehearing is denied. 17157 OPINION MOLLWAY. He would have discovered her herniated discs. The ALJ would then have found her disabled and therefore eligible to receive disability insurance benefits. Mayes therefore asks this court to reverse the district court's affirmance of the ALJ's decision and to remand the case to the ALJ for further consideration of whether she is disabled in light of her herniated discs. We affirm the ALJ's determination that Mayes was not disabled. We find that this </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="499"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/991055.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Nottoway County contends that its decision to deny the permit was indeed supported by </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="497"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//may96/94-9025.opa.html">FIRST NAT'L BANK OF BOSTON V. THOMSON CONSUMER ELECT., INC.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>First Nat'l Bank of Boston v. To which this case was removed from state court. The contract was later extended for another year. The case was converted into a Chapter 7 liquidation and a trustee was appointed. Before the settlement was approved. The case was subsequently removed to the district court.<p> On July 29. The court did not allow Thomson to recoup the value of shipments that were lost after January 3. Argues that the applicable rules are found in N.C.Gen.Stat. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="497"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/EE4D2E5B42A85E5D88256BB8007E2C84/$file/0056913.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: This appeal presents the question of whether tax deferred variable annuities are covered securities under the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="497"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-2022_012.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The plaintiff is a young woman employed in a casket factory. She met and had drinks with a seemingly very respectable Guatemalan lawyer he was visiting Washington as a member of a delegation that included that country's president. As the plaintiff was waiting in front of a bank of elevators to return to her room. Because there was no one in sight. She got out at the next floor and was discovered by a security guard. The rapist was soon arrested. He was convicted of sexual assault. One of the security guards was sick and the other two were patrolling. So there was no guard either in the lobby or monitoring the cameras. Anyway there was no security camera trained on the area in front of the bank of elevators. Would any of them have noticed the initial assault unless they happened to be near the bank of elevators. The hotel has a duty to take precautions that are reasonable in relation to the likelihood that without them guests will be victims of criminal acts. The duty is imposed by tort law. Like liability for medical or legal malpractice is most intuitively understood as an implied term in the contract between injurer and victim. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="497"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may96/94-9025.opa.html">FIRST NAT'L BANK OF BOSTON V. THOMSON CONSUMER ELECT., INC.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>First Nat'l Bank of Boston v. To which this case was removed from state court. The contract was later extended for another year. The case was converted into a Chapter 7 liquidation and a trustee was appointed. Before the settlement was approved. The case was subsequently removed to the district court.<p> On July 29. The court did not allow Thomson to recoup the value of shipments that were lost after January 3. Argues that the applicable rules are found in N.C.Gen.Stat. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="497"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052721np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> District Judge: Petitioner David Stafford Sinclair ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/964871.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Mike Kazinec were all convicted of conspiracy to transport or receive stolen goods. Actually was a largescale fence who bought stolen OTC and HBA from a number of shoplifters and smalltime fences. There was evidence that only four of the defendants. Actually knew that his OTC and HBA was stolen. The government proceeded on the dubious theory that the defendants were deliberately ignorant to the true source of Thomas's OTC and HBA because Thomas's operation was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/01/021979P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Concluding that District Deputy Comptroller John Bodnar is entitled to qualified immunity regarding his action in approving Mr. That all defendants are entitled to absolute immunity regarding the other regulatory actions challenged in the amended complaint. Northwest National Bank was a distressed bank operating in Gravette. None of which was based on a comprehensive examination of the actual loan files. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTIxNDktY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-2149-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Judge) dismissed the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) on the ground that the call options' expiration was not a purchase for purposes of section 16(b) liability. Circuit Judge: BACKGROUND Plaintiff Allaire Corporation ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/05/972466P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiff argues that the district court erred in holding that her claim is non justiciable For the reasons discussed under the Feres2 doctrine. below. Jurisdiction Jurisdiction was proper in the district court based upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331. Jurisdiction is proper in this court based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The notice of appeal was timely filed pursuant to Rule 4(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Background Plaintiff is a female Master Sergeant in the Iowa National Guard. Plaintiff was serving as the Detachment Sergeant for the 1088th Personnel Services Company which is also located at Camp Dodge. The Detachment Sergeant position is a National Guard position which requires the traditional reserve service commitment 2 Feres v. 340 U.S. 135 (1950) (holding that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200101/99-1453a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Leo were on brief. Were on brief. Hiatt were on brief for amicus curiae American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations Before: Henderson. NLRB) finding that Ross violated section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act (Act) when (1) it discharged an employee on account of his union support and (2) its supervisor informed the same employee that no soliciting was allowed on company premises. We uphold the Board's finding as to the discharge because it is supported by substantial evidence and set aside its finding regarding the solicitation admonition because it is time barred under section 10(b) of the Act. Three incidents during the organizing campaign were alleged below to constitute unfair labor practices by Ross. He removed the postings and later admonished each of them separately that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2117C3F27A15721988256E740074754D/$file/0216532.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because NIBCO has failed to demonstrate that the protective order was either clearly erroneous or contrary to law. I. Factual and Procedural Background The plaintiffs in this dispute are twenty three Latina and Southeast Asian female immigrants once employed as production workers at NIBCO's factory in Fresno. California.1 All of the plaintiffs are of limited English proficiency. NIBCO allegedly responded with a The suit was originally brought by twenty five named plaintiffs as representatives of a similarly situated class. Some plaintiffs were demoted or transferred to undesirable job assignments. All plaintiffs were terminated in the period between July 30. NIBCO asked where she was married and where she was born. Although Rivera had specified that she was of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/05/97-9535.htm">97-9535 -- ARAMARK CORP. V. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD -- 05/28/1999<BR></A><BR> Argued that the Board was without jurisdiction in these matters because: (1) . The operations at issue are exempt from Board jurisdiction under the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0135p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Timothy Mellen and Elizabeth Lentsch were convicted of trespassing on Department of Energy property in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2278a(c) and 10 C.F.R. §§ 860.3 and 860.5.1 They appeal their convictions. The statute provides: (a) The [Atomic Energy] Commission is authorized to issue regulations relating to the entry upon . . . any facility. 000. (c) W hoever shall willfully violate any regulation of the Commission issued pursuant to subsection (a) of this section with respect to any installation or other property which is enclo sed b y a fence. The functions of the Atomic Energy Commission have been transferred to the Administrator of the Energy Research and D evelopment Administration. Nos. 02 6192/6193 arguing that they were deprived of due process because the information failed to allege an essential element of 10 C.F.R. § 860.5 that the property they entered upon was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/07/01-6249.htm">01-6249 -- NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA V. LSB INDUSTRIES, INC. -- 07/10/2002<BR></A><BR> Requires us to decide whether the district court erred in determining that the insurance company's demands for unpaid insurance premiums were not barred by the Oklahoma Statute of Limitations. Are structured so that the statute of limitations is not triggered until a final premium adjustment becomes due. <p> <center><strong>I.</strong></center> <p> Appellee is a commercial insurance company that issued policies of insurance to LSB and its subsidiaries. Premiums under each retention agreement are adjusted annually. Either to require additional payments from the insured or refunds from the insurer. <p> The total amount due for losses is defined as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/04/031409P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Masterson contends that the ALJ's decision was not supported by substantial evidence. She was able to care for herself independently and assist in the care of her grandchildren. Masterson was able to sit. She was also able to get on and off the examination table. She did have crepitus in her knees and wrists. Masterson's deep tendon reflexes and general strength were normal. McPeak reported that Masterson appeared to have functional mobility skills. Although they were slow. Later anti nuclear AB and rheumatoid factor testing was negative. This diagnosis was repeated in two additional records: the first in a letter written by a nurse used to excuse Masterson from jury duty. Masterson testified that she was fifty four years old and had completed two years of college. She lived with and was the sole caretaker of her three grandchildren. Masterson's past relevant work was as a property manager for an apartment building. When she was no longer able to perform this job due to pain and an inability to walk. She testified that she was disabled due to insomnia and severe pain in her shoulders. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200315164.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BACKGROUND Dailide was born in Kaunas. The order of removal was never executed: the government never deported Dailide to Lithuania. We are persuaded that the petition may be reviewed. The denial of Dailide's social security benefits is clearly a collateral consequence of the order of removal. An </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/429E2096892C3D8388256E00005FEB65/$file/0355785final.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issues we are required to confront are new. 1 scores of individuals who were captured by the American military during its operations in Afghanistan. The captured individuals were labeled </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug99/98-2763.ma2.html">KELLEY V. APFEL (8/25/1999, NO. 98-2763)<BR></A><BR> To determine his ability to engage in substantial gainful activity.</P> <P> This Court affirms the Commissioner's decision on a disability benefits application if it is supported by substantial evidence and the correct legal standards were applied. <EM>Graham v. The controlling issue with respect to the instant application is whether those impairments caused Kelley to be disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act during a narrow window of time between September 26. 1991.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug99/98-2763.ma2.html">KELLEY V. APFEL (8/25/1999, NO. 98-2763)<BR></A><BR> To determine his ability to engage in substantial gainful activity.</P> <P> This Court affirms the Commissioner's decision on a disability benefits application if it is supported by substantial evidence and the correct legal standards were applied. <EM>Graham v. The controlling issue with respect to the instant application is whether those impairments caused Kelley to be disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act during a narrow window of time between September 26. 1991.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0E19D5FA5D1D35B088256E0600015A55/$file/0355785.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issues we are required to confront are new. 1 scores of individuals who were captured by the American military during its operations in Afghanistan. The captured individuals were labeled </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/12/962433P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is a lien priority dispute between a perfected security interest held by Bremen Bank and Trust Company (the Bank) and a federal tax lien. The Bank claims the IRS's levies against Ingredient's contractual customers were wrongful because the tax lien was junior to the Bank's prior perfected security interest in the proceeds of Ingredient's contract rights. Because that money was subject to the Bank's automatic right of setoff under Missouri law. Was a trucking company that transported general commodities. The price of shipping was to be determined by Ingredient's attached schedule of rates. Payment was due upon the completion of Ingredient's performance. Two of the contracts were minimum requirements contracts under which Ingredient's customers. Were required to tender to Ingredient a minimum quantity of goods to be shipped during the contract period. These contracts were effective for a term of one year and were automatically renewed after that from year to year. The third shipping contract was a three year. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="494"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/99opinions/99-1453a.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Leo were on brief.</P> <P> Jill A. Were on brief.</P> <P> James B. Hiatt were on brief for </P> <P>amicus curiae American Federation of Labor and Congress </P> <P>of Industrial Organizations</P> <P> Before: Henderson. NLRB) finding that </P> <P>Ross violated section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the National Labor </P> <P>Relations Act (Act) when (1) it discharged an employee on </P> <P>account of his union support and (2) its supervisor informed </P> <P>the same employee that no soliciting was allowed on company </P> <P>premises. We uphold the Board's finding as to the discharge </P> <P>because it is supported by substantial evidence and set aside </P> <P>its finding regarding the solicitation admonition because it is </P> <P>time barred under section 10(b) of the Act. </P> <P>Three incidents during the organizing campaign were alleged </P> <P>below to constitute unfair labor practices by Ross.</P> <P> First. He removed </P> <P>the postings and later admonished each of them separately </P> <P>that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept99/98-6797.man.html">JONES V. APFEL (9/29/1999, NO. 98-6797)<BR></A><BR> We are called upon to decide if the testimony of a vocational expert ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/09/03-7125.htm">03-7125 -- RHODES V. BARNHART -- 09/07/2004<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff appellant Jerry Rhodes appeals from an order of the district court affirming the Social Security Administration's decision denying his application for disability insurance benefits. After his application for disability benefits was denied initially and on reconsideration. A de novo hearing was held before an administrative law judge (ALJ). Concluding that plaintiff was not disabled because: (1) although he suffered from severe impairments in the form of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and osteoarthritis which prevented him from performing his past relevant work as a heavy equipment operator and pipeline foreman. He was capable of performing other jobs that existed in significant numbers in the national economy. <p> In January 2003. The ALJ's decision is the Commissioner's final decision for purposes of this appeal. <em>See Doyal v. We review the ALJ's decision only to determine whether the correct legal standards were applied and whether the ALJ's factual findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record. <em>Doyal</em>. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept99/98-6797.man.html">JONES V. APFEL (9/29/1999, NO. 98-6797)<BR></A><BR> We are called upon to decide if the testimony of a vocational expert ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/01/021544P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Curran Kicksey was not disabled. CurranKicksey's subjective complaints of pain and ruled that she was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act because she retained the residual functional capacity to perform work in the national economy. We review matters of law de novo and determine whether the ALJ's findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. Because we find that the ALJ committed no legal error and that its findings were supported by substantial evidence. Curran Kicksey did not meet all of the requirements of § 1.05C and thus was not conclusively presumed to be disabled under that section. The ALJ concluded that there was no medical evidence in the record that Ms. All of which were required under § 1.05C. Curran Kicksey has now shifted direction somewhat and argues that § 1.05C is inapplicable to her situation: She urges us instead to apply new musculoskeletal listings that went into effect on February 19. § 1.05C was replaced by a new listing applicable to disorders of the spine. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/99opinions/99-5307b.html">JENNIFER K. HARBURY V. JOHN M. DEUTCH<BR></A><BR> With her </p> <p>on the briefs were Paul Hoffman. With him on the brief was Wilma A. </p> <p>Lewis. She also </p> <p>claims that while he was being tortured and for more than a </p> <p>year and a half after his death. Defendants were entitled to qualified </p> <p>immunity. Because </p> <p>the NSC and State Department officials are not entitled to </p> <p>qualified immunity on this claim. Emphasizing that </p> <p>defendants have not yet answered Harbury's charges and </p> <p>that her claims have been subject to neither discovery nor </p> <p>cross examination. Bamaca </p> <p>committed suicide and was buried nearby. This was false. </p> <p>In fact. </p> <p>Harbury learned from a prisoner who had escaped from a </p> <p>Guatemalan interrogation camp that her husband was alive </p> <p>and being tortured. Discovering that the body there was not </p> <p>his. </p> <p>Harbury met repeatedly with State Department officials. </p> <p>Saying they were concerned about Bamaca's situation. These </p> <p>officials reassured her they were seriously looking into the </p> <p>matter and told her the Guatemalan Military had informed </p> <p>them that it did not have (and never had) custody of Bamaca.</p> <p> . </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/09/98-7188.htm">98-7188 -- SKAGGS V. APFEL -- 09/08/1999<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Patrick E. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052107np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Leech appeals the District Court's order affirming the Social Security Commissioner's determination that she is not disabled and therefore not entitled to Disability Insurance Benefits ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/90331D3BF2ED3AE588256DDD0000110B/$file/0235731.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> OPINION PER CURIAM: Joseph and Judy Pauly are farmers who entered into a tenyear agreement with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) whereby the USDA agreed to restructure the Paulys' debt in exchange for a portion of the appreciation in the value of their farm during the term of the agreement. The Paulys argue that the Government or its agents are liable for tort damages arising from fraud in the inducement. The district court affirmed the USDA's determination that appreciation was due under the agreement and granted in part the USDA's motion for summary judgment. The district court was correct in enforcing the agreement according to its terms and in conformity with the statute governing the USDA's loan program. Held a portfolio that was severely threatened by the declining net worth of U.S. farmers. The vast majority of FmHA's outstanding farm debt was delinquent. Which allowed farmers who were delinquent in payments to restructure their debts. Joseph and Judy Pauly are farmers who were delinquent in their loans from the USDA. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/June1994/94a0750p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which the Salvation Army was holding. Were part of the estate in bankruptcy. We will reverse the order directing turnover to the Bank. We will therefore remand this issue to the bankruptcy court for further proceedings in this regard. Which was incorporated by reference into the bonds.[fn1] In March 1989. Modular also executed a Uniform Commercial Code Financing Statement which was filed on April 20. Modular commenced work on the Salvation Army project but was unable to complete all of its obligations under the contract. A Trustee was appointed. First Indemnity contends that the unpaid contract proceeds and retainage held by the Salvation Army were not properly characterized as accounts receivable owing to Modular so that the Bank's superpriority lien would apply to them. The Salvation Army was not obligated to make final payment to Modular until: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021980.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The notes bear the crest of the NDSC and are payable in U.S. Mawardi certified that they were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/08/973000P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Apfel has been appointed to serve as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration and is automatically substituted as appellee. I. Fenton applied for SSI disability benefits alleging that he was disabled due to a variety of impairments. Fenton requested and received a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) after his application for Social Security Disability Benefits was denied on November 8. Fenton was a 49 year old male with a general equivalency degree. (2) he was unable to perform his past relevant work as a rural electrification lineman. (3) he is closely approaching advanced age. (4) he does not have any acquired work skills which are transferable to the skilled or semi skilled work functions of other work. He was examined for chest pains. Was referred for a treadmill test which was positive for inferior wall ischemia. Medication was prescribed and upon review. The doctor concluded he was doing fairly well. Fenton was treated for complaints of pain in his right leg and numbness in his toes on both feet at a time when poor control of diabetes was noted. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/814C319F3A66E70B8825709F00808502/$file/0250355.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Facts The issue here is the constitutionality of the crime charged in the indictment. Wired money from the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-5107a.html">PFEIFFER JACK V. CIA<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200101/99-5307b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Paul Hoffman. With him on the brief was Wilma A. She also claims that while he was being tortured and for more than a year and a half after his death. Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Because the NSC and State Department officials are not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Emphasizing that defendants have not yet answered Harbury's charges and that her claims have been subject to neither discovery nor cross examination. Bamaca committed suicide and was buried nearby. This was false. Harbury learned from a prisoner who had escaped from a Guatemalan interrogation camp that her husband was alive and being tortured. Discovering that the body there was not his. Saying they were concerned about Bamaca's situation. These officials reassured her they were seriously looking into the matter and told her the Guatemalan Military had informed them that it did not have (and never had) custody of Bamaca. The State Department also reported that it had no information confirming that Bamaca was still alive. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="492"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200012/99-5307a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Paul Hoffman. With him on the brief was Wilma A. She also claims that while he was being tortured and for more than a year and a half after his death. Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Because the NSC and State Department officials are not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Emphasizing that defendants have not yet answered Harbury's charges and that her claims have been subject to neither discovery nor cross examination. Bamaca committed suicide and was buried nearby. This was false. Harbury learned from a prisoner who had escaped from a Guatemalan interrogation camp that her husband was alive and being tortured. Discovering that the body there was not his. Saying they were concerned about Bamaca's situation. These officials reassured her they were seriously looking into the matter and told her the Guatemalan Military had informed them that it did not have (and never had) custody of Bamaca. The State Department also reported that it had no information confirming that Bamaca was still alive. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200406/03-5232a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200411/03-1371a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/034162.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Chief Judge: This appeal is one of extraordinary importance. Presenting a direct conflict between a criminal defendant's right </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/May2004/032709np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm. Appellate jurisdiction is vested in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. In sequence: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. The burden is on the claimant at the first four steps. Who are familiar with the facts of this case. The ALJ determined that Caruso did not have an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/022199.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 2 and line 9 the citations are corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/43004FF302EB6E09882571F7004DF7DF/$file/0373734.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: Masoud Hosseini is an Iranian citizen who came to the United States on a student visa. He was ordered deported as an overstay. The immigration judge also denied relief under the Convention Against Torture on the ground that Hosseini had failed to show that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if deported to Iran. The Immigration and Naturalization Service ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200305/02-5193b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Senior Circuit Judge ORDER It is. McGrail Deputy Clerk Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Federal Reporter or U.S.App.D.C. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of any formal errors in order that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. With him on the briefs were Roscoe C. Specifically at issue is Treasury's selection of a ``weighted national average'' methodology to calculate locality pay increases under the Federal Law Enforcement Pay Reform Act of 1990 (``FLEPRA''). The conceptual difficulty arises because locality pay increases are geographically fixed while the DCRA's equalization provision is based on the salary of an agent in active service. Notwithstanding the fact that Secret Service agents have postings throughout the United States and overseas. No issue is before the court regarding the entitlement of those retirees to locality pay adjustments. Treasury's methodology is fair and valid. That Treasury ­ as opposed to the District of Columbia ­ is the proper locus of decisionmaking for calculating the amount of locality pay for Secret Service retirees who have opted to retire under the DCRA. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/apr97/96-5104.wpd.html">FOX V. MAULDING<BR></A><BR> Concluding that the action was barred under the doctrines of claim and issue preclusion.(1) 1. They were driven further and further into debt. One of the last events in the series of allegedly fraudulent acts by defendants was a $94. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. additional money to pay off an existing SNB loan that had matured and to provide additional capital for the tire business. Both Odell and Sharon Fox were parties to this action. As were Scott Wilmott and his wife. While the foreclosure and dissolution actions were still pending in state court. Concluding that the present claims were either compulsory counterclaims in the foreclosure action or were actually determined in the partnership dissolution action and. Were barred. (2) The Foxes had been represented in the foreclosure action and the dissolution action by other counsel. 2. Preclusive Effects of the State Court Actions Federal courts must give to state court judgments </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A02E32075152684B88256B6F0056C91F/$file/9935922.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Barnhart is substituted for her predecessors. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Lewis was working at a gas station as a cashier and attendant. She explained that when heavy boxes and soft drink orders were delivered the male employees would take care of moving them. That she was allowed to have a chair or stool to sit on while she worked. You were a cashier. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug95/94-2683.opa.html">SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSP. V. SHALALA<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Sarasota Memorial Hosp. v. Appeal from the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of Health and Human Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-5278a.html">NATIONAL MINING ASSOCIATION V. DEPT OF MINING<BR></A><BR> Solomons argued the cause for appellants.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-5278b.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Solomons argued the cause for appellants.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200206/01-5278b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Laura Metcoff Klaus. With her on the brief were Roscoe C. With him on the brief were Grant Crandall and Judith Rivlin. The case will be remanded to the District Court with instructions to re mand the case to the Department of Labor for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. I. Background The BLBA is a federally administered law providing bene fits to coal miners who are totally disabled due to pneumoco niosis. Coal mine operators are responsible for paying benefits to miners whose death or total disability due to black lung disease arose out of employment in the mines. 30 U.S.C. s 932. It is caused by the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug95/94-2683.opa.html">SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSP. V. SHALALA<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Sarasota Memorial Hosp. v. Appeal from the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of Health and Human Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200206/01-5278a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Laura Metcoff Klaus. With her on the brief were Roscoe C. With him on the brief were Grant Crandall and Judith Rivlin. The case will be remanded to the District Court with instructions to re mand the case to the Department of Labor for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. I. Background The BLBA is a federally administered law providing bene fits to coal miners who are totally disabled due to pneumoco niosis. Coal mine operators are responsible for paying benefits to miners whose death or total disability due to black lung disease arose out of employment in the mines. 30 U.S.C. s 932. It is caused by the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-6002.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because we conclude that Oklahoma is not acting contrary to Congressional intent. I Reames is a 51 year old disabled inhabitant of an Oklahoma nursing home whose only income is from monthly Social Security Disability ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199806/97-1638a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on the brief. The matter in dis pute is covered by the arbitration clause in the CBA. The Board should have deferred to arbitration. Approximately 20 Burns employees at Yankee Rowe were represented by a union affiliated with United Government Security Officers of America ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/034256p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> She discovered that the hospital was committing infanticide in an attempt to comply with China's population control policy. After her letter to a Hong Kong news reporter exposing this practice was intercepted by the Chinese government. She says that she was detained for three months. Cao's allegations that she was persecuted for exposing and criticizing the practice of infanticide. After declaring that Cao's demeanor as a witness was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1997/97a1702p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are asked to decide whether a highly structured securitization transaction negotiated between Citicorp and an investor in a limited partnership constitutes an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-5242a.html">CHAMBER CMERC US V. REICH ROBERT B.<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/06/053106P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The proper remedy is a remand to the Social Security Administration ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200004/98-5235a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the brief were David M. The district court should have abstained under principles of international comity. He did not violate the securities laws of the United States because the interests Swiss Trade sold were not securities. Neither summary judgment nor the relief granted the SEC are warranted. Some of Blackwell's arguments are not properly before this court. The others are without merit. The individual investor was not a party to the Endeavor Trust agreement and was not ordinarily ap prised of the terms of the trust arrangement prior to invest ing. Was directed at low income individuals to whom Blackwell privately referred as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-5235a.html">SEC V. BANNER FUND INTERNATIONAL, ET AL.<BR></A><BR> With him on the </P> <P>brief were David M. The district court should have abstained </P> <P>under principles of international comity. He did not violate </P> <P>the securities laws of the United States because the interests </P> <P>Swiss Trade sold were not securities. Neither summary </P> <P>judgment nor the relief granted the SEC are warranted. </P> <P>Some of Blackwell's arguments are not properly before this </P> <P>court. The others are without merit. The individual investor was not a party to </P> <P>the Endeavor Trust agreement and was not ordinarily ap </P> <P>prised of the terms of the trust arrangement prior to invest </P> <P>ing. Was directed at low income </P> <P>individuals to whom Blackwell privately referred as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/14505BCB29D4273088256BED006FAB2C/$file/0150159.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was on the briefs. Were on the brief. A border search of a toolbox in the bed of a truck was routine and whether a detention became an arrest when a customs inspector briefly handcuffed the truck's driver. Bravo stated that he was an American citizen traveling to the market and post office. Which explained why he was not its registered owner. Inspector Tijerina thought Bravo was being </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-3921.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Robert Rollins was charged with four counts of bank robbery. Rollins pleaded not guilty and was convicted at trial on all counts. Missouri and was subsequently apprehended. Rollins was eventually indicted for the Chicago robberies and charged with four counts of bank robbery. The case was tried before a jury. We will describe chronologically the testimony and evidence related to each crime. Which was positively identified as a government exhibit after it was recovered from the Rollins' home. (4) the use of a handgun that was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CE8CA041B51298D5882572510079BB3A/$file/0373734.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is GRANTED. Is amended as follows: At 464 F.3d 1024. That footnote is to state: The government points out that it is precluded by regulation from disclosing any information relating to Hosseini's asylum application </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043504np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm the judgment of the District Court. The date Kelley was last insured for disability benefits. The ALJ concluded that Kelley was not under a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb1995/94a0967p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will reverse and remand to the district court for further proceedings. We will limit the triable issues on remand to a determination of: (1) the definition of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F31BC7CFC2E61F36882572BA0076FFCD/$file/0256256.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ORDER Rio Tinto's petition for rehearing and for rehearing en banc is granted in part. Are hereby withdrawn. A superseding opinion and dissent will be filed concurrently with this order. Plaintiffs are current or former residents of Bougainville. Who allege that they or their family members were the victims of numerous violations of international law as a result of defendant mining corporation Rio Tinto. Which provides that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/064089np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm. McCauley alleged that he was issued an identification card several days later. Was then instructed to go home and await further instructions because of a questionable criminal background check. Told him that Computer Aid was terminating his employment because he failed to complete and meet its hiring criteria. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Our standard of review is plenary. Established that he is a member of a protected class and qualified to perform his job. He did not plead facts showing that he was fired under circumstances that give rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination. McCauley does not contend that he was fired because he is American. A requirement he acknowledges was imposed on all of Computer Aid's employees. Other courts of appeals have rejected similar discrimination claims. 75 (2d Cir. 2006) (holding that employee who was fired for refusing to provide her social security number to her employer for fear of identity theft failed to state a claim under anti discrimination statutes). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/982260.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Wagner was 23 years old at the onset of the alleged disability. 2 affirmed the Commissioner's decision that Wagner was not disabled. On or after such date . . . there is pending a request for either administrative or judicial review with respect to such claim . . .. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200312/02-1300a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0431p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Those practices are not the subject of Vanguard's appeal.1 Vanguard appeals the Board's final Order. Claiming there was not substantial evidence in the record to support the Board's decision that Vanguard violated the Act. The Union was certified as the representative of employees who were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May1994/94a0702p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> These loans were evidenced by the following seven promissory notes: 1. a $185. This letter is at the heart of this action. The letter was signed by William Carlough. The following are the most significant provisions of the letter: (1) the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200307/02-1308a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-2233.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C. were on brief for appellant. Richardson and Gelinas were on brief for appellee. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="489"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200107/99-1009a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the brief were William Malone and Nicholas P. With him on the brief were Christopher J. With him on the brief were James H. Or use of [anten nas that are designed to receive direct broadcast satellite service. Is invalid on its face. If there is no taking. We deny the petition. 1 Petitioners are the Building Owners and Managers Associa tion International. Or use of [a s 207 device] ... is prohibited.... 47 C.F.R. s 1.4000 (1996). The rule allowed for several exceptions: Restric tions on s 207 devices were permissible if they served a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="484"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4AE8C752D9F8836788256CAE00581170/$file/0070014.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sewers are also used on occasion as an easy (if illicit) means for the direct discharge of unwanted contaminants. They are subject to the controls of the Clean Water Act. 578 ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER v. The Problem of Stormwater Runoff Stormwater runoff is one of the most significant sources of water pollution in the nation. SediThe </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="484"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001120.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> MOUNTAINEER STEEL Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Because we conclude that the Board's decision is supported by substantial evidence and is correct as a matter of law. Which is known as miners' vacation. Layoffs are made by the company's president. When the 1995 Agreement was signed. The Agreement was only enforced for a short period of time. Kerns asked the employees at the work site if they </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="484"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/96311E1BD528E6CC88256DA2005952F9/$file/0070014.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Are vacated. They are replaced by the Opinion and Dissent filed today. The petitions for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. The clerk is instructed not to accept for filing any new petitions for rehearing or petitions for rehearing en banc in this case. 13774 ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER v. Sewers are also used on occasion as an easy (if illicit) means for the direct discharge of unwanted contaminants. They are subject to the controls of the Clean Water Act. EPA preserved The </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="484"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTIxNDkgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-2149%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Judge) dismissed the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) on the ground that the call options' expiration was not a purchase for purposes of section 16(b) liability. Circuit Judge: BACKGROUND Plaintiff Allaire Corporation ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/07/99-2278.htm">99-2278 -- CORDOBA V. MASSANARI -- 07/20/2001<BR></A><BR> The SSA is authorized to pay an attorney his fees directly from the past due benefits due a claimant. <u>See</u> 46 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-5101.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> On counsel were W. With him on the brief were Peter D. Of counsel on the brief were Walter F. This is a post award bid protest case. PGBA filed suit in the United States Court of Federal Claims seeking to have the award of the contract to WPS set aside. Rule that PGBA was entitled to recover its reasonable bid preparation and proposal costs. TRICARE is a military health care benefits program that provides health care benefits to dependents of active duty service members and to retired service members and their dependents. TRICARE is administered within the Department of Defense by TMA. The TRICARE system was divided into eleven geographical PGBA filed its first motion for reconsideration after the court issued its original order under seal. TMA will consolidate the MCS contracts from seven contracts covering eleven regions to three contracts covering three regions. This new contract is called the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/199911372.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is a municipal corporation organized under the laws of Alabama. From 1953 to 1973 Stylon discharged substances that are hazardous within the meaning of § 101(14) of CERCLA. Although Appellant apparently was not responsible for most of the pollution. Was directed to clean up the facility under CERCLA. Holding that Appellee was exempted from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 9601(20)(A). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961722.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Stroup began her cardiac rehabilitation program while at the same time her left leg was healing from an incision opened during surgery. After Stroup reported that she was still having problems with her memory. Kay found that Stroup's recognition memory was relatively normal. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/06/963287P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Their claims were disallowed. Although there were several issues decided by the District Court. 1988 James Alford was an employee within the meaning of the relevant provisions of the tax code.1 On their federal income tax returns for those years. The taxpayers claimed that Alford was not an employee but an independent contractor. The IRS determined that he was an employee and recalculated the Alfords' tax liability. If he was an independent contractor. Then he was entitled to deduct the full amount of his business expenses from his earned income for those years. If on the other hand he was an employee. The assessed deficiencies at issue on appeal are the result of the difference in the amount of business expenses allowed as deductions under these two calculations. It appears they are challenging only one year's assessment of tax deficiencies. Alford was selfemployed during 1986. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0540n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> FACTUAL BACKGROUND Pasco believes her alleged disability is a result of a horrific. Was kidnapped. She underwent surgery and was hospitalized for twelve days. When she was released. Noted that Pasco was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/002545.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Board held that the Company (1) subjected employees to a formal disciplinary procedure after it had become clear that their conduct was protected by § 7. Because the confiscations of union literature were unlawful. Which is considered offensive to the receiver or a third party may be labeled harassment. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-2517.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Outboard Marine Corporation is in Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Among its holdings are the assets. In what is known as a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199712/96-1399a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on the brief. Gold were on the brief. Smetana was on the brief for amicus curiae Council on Labor Law Equality. Raises were based solely on merit. Its decisions were excluded from the contractual grievance and arbitration pro cedure. Their proposals were diametrically opposed: McClatchy want ed to move to a system based entirely on its determination of merit. Ninety percent of the employees were already at the top salary step in their class. Since the 1986 scales were out of step with the cost of living. McClatchy asserted that it was implementing its final offer and began granting increases to employees without consulting the union. Under the terms of McClatchy's pro posal as was true under the 1986 agreement the union's role was restricted to making nonbinding comments and participating in the appeal process only if asked by the employee. The only difference in the Modesto proposal was that it fixed the timing of merit increases. Increases were tied to the annual review process. The union complained that the posting was a veiled threat to employees. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/062197np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Bordes argues that the procedures leading to the denial decision were fundamentally unfair. That the denial decision was not supported by substantial evidence. We affirm the District Court's judgment because the procedures leading to the Commissioner's denial decision were not fundamentally unfair. That the record is not sufficiently developed to warrant reversal and an award of benefits. The request for reconsideration was denied on February 20. The request for a hearing was granted on April 6. The hearing was held on March 16. It is our contention that the denial by the Administrative Law Judge was improper. The Appeals Council stated that the ALJ's decision </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001493.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which are circulated in the area around Baltimore. Its primary office is located in downtown Baltimore. Employees in the mechanical and nonmechanical departments have elected to be included in the Union's bargaining unit. While the efforts of these employees have focused historically on the production of The Sun and The Sunday Sun. The employees have also had responsibility for publishing other documents on a regular basis. Other employees of the Company are represented by other unions. Still others are not represented by any union. When the Company and the Union were completing negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement. The Company was in the preliminary stages of developing the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2342.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> LLC</SPAN> were on brief. Miller</SPAN> were on brief. Alleging that it was a price fixing purchasing pool. </EM>OSF was tasked with designing and marketing a UNIX based operating system known as OSF/1 that would become an industry standard for UNIX users. Which essentially offered competing suppliers the opportunity to submit their products to be integrated into the OSF/1 operating system.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0103n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Commissioner responds that Lian was not a treating physician because he saw Kornecky only once. That his opinion was inconsistent with more well supported opinions rendered by other sources. A subjective allegation of disabling symptoms alone is insufficient. 2 the SSA explained what is needed under the regulations to show a medically determinable impairment: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-1166a.html">PAUL LINDSAY V. NTSB<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/10/054251P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lacroix is a fifty one year old woman with a GED and past work experience as a construction worker and cashier. Lacroix was examined by three physicians in connection with her physical ailments. Tomek diagnosed Lacroix with bilateral hearing loss that was progressive in nature. Lacroix's discrimination was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199803/97-1204a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom Gregory O'Duden was on the briefs. Were on the brief. Roth and Judith Galat were on the brief for intervenor American Federation of Government Employees. Roth was on the briefs. Attorney at the time the briefs were filed. Was on the briefs. With whom Gregory O'Du den was on the brief. Was premised upon an errone ous reading of the case law. We remand this claim for the district court to determine whether there is still a case or controversy between the parties in light of our decision in No. 97 1204. Which was organizing a nationwide campaign to replace the AFGE as the exclusive bargaining representative of SSA employees. Customary and routine services and facilities if the services and facilities are also furnished on an impartial basis to other labor organizations having equivalent status. The NTEU also filed a charge with the FLRA claiming that the SSA's denial of its applications for a permit was an unfair labor practice. At least where the complainant is not an affected employee. To have issued a permit. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/955207.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The judgments of conviction are affirmed. One of whom was noticeably taller and larger than the other. One of the men was wearing a sweatshirt with a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may2000/99-11372.man.html">MONARCH TILE, INC. V. CITY OF FLORENCE (5/25/2000, NO. 99-11372)<BR></A><BR> Is a municipal corporation organized under the laws of Alabama. 000.</P> <P> From 1953 to 1973 Stylon discharged substances that are hazardous within the meaning of § 101(14) of CERCLA. Although Appellant apparently was not responsible for most of the pollution. Was directed to clean up the facility under CERCLA. Holding that Appellee was exempted from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 9601(20)(A). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 1509 (11th Cir.1993).</P> <P><CENTER>II.</CENTER> </P> <P> CERCLA is a broad. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/171CD1E38EC5AA008825731A004CA06A/$file/0516181.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Astrue is substituted for his predecessor Jo Anne B. Circuit Judge: Leo Orn filed an application for Social Security benefits claiming that he was unable to work because of disability. The Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1136.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C. were on brief for appellant. Allen & Snyder were on brief for appellees. Was fraudulently induced to discharge six consignments of frozen scallops. The discharged scallops were seized by appellees Fleet National Bank and Cooper ative Centrale Raiffeisen Boerenleenbank B.A. (hereinafter. Glouces 1An order bill of lading is a negotiable instrument. Issued by the carrier to the shipper at the time goods are loaded aboard ship. As documentary evidence of title to those goods. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200706/06-5133a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was E. Green was on the brief for amici curiae American Medical Association et al. in support of appellant. With her on the brief were Jeffrey S. Circuit Judge: The issue in this case is standing to challenge a regulatory safe harbor where the direct cause of injury is the independent action of a third party. The same issue was before this court in National Wrestling Coaches Ass'n v. Though the factual context there was very different. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/10/01-6169.htm">01-6169 -- REVELL V. HOFFMAN -- 10/30/2002<BR></A><BR> Wheaton and Feral House were dismissed. <em>Nightline</em>. <p> David Hoffman is the author of two books. The following passages are from <em>Oklahoma City Bombing</em>: <p> 1. Wheaton was approached by security consultants to Vice President Bush's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/02/991794P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. BACKGROUND Federal law limits the amount of Social Security disability insurance benefits that a person may receive when he or she is also receiving state workers' compensation benefits. The Commissioner must </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=10&date=01&year=02">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/991451.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Durham is a thirty five year old woman who lives in Richmond. Durham was subsequently diagnosed with herniated discs and degenerative disc disease. The Service found on both occasions that Durham's medical condition was severe. That it was not expected to last twelve months as required by the Social Security Act. The only witnesses at the hearing were Durham and a vocational expert. Durham testified that she was thirty one years old and a mother of five. She has to have them get the pots out for her. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//may2000/99-11372.man.html">MONARCH TILE, INC. V. CITY OF FLORENCE (5/25/2000, NO. 99-11372)<BR></A><BR> Is a municipal corporation organized under the laws of Alabama. 000.</P> <P> From 1953 to 1973 Stylon discharged substances that are hazardous within the meaning of § 101(14) of CERCLA. Although Appellant apparently was not responsible for most of the pollution. Was directed to clean up the facility under CERCLA. Holding that Appellee was exempted from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 9601(20)(A). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 1509 (11th Cir.1993).</P> <P><CENTER>II.</CENTER> </P> <P> CERCLA is a broad. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0143p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The plaintiffs are African American and Caucasian voters residing in Hamilton. (2) the use of error prone voting equipment deprives voters of their due process right to have their votes counted accurately. Some commentators have suggested that these types of voting rights challenges are taking us into a brave new world. Others suggest that they are simply variations of old challenges. Code § 3506.15.1 The Secretary has certified two general types of equipment: (1) </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052089np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the Commissioner's determination that Sassone was capable of performing a significant number of light and sedentary jobs in the national economy. That he thus was not disabled as defined by the Act. We will affirm. I. The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history both in the District Court and before the Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/199911372.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is a municipal corporation organized under the laws of Alabama. From 1953 to 1973 Stylon discharged substances that are hazardous within the meaning of § 101(14) of CERCLA. Although Appellant apparently was not responsible for most of the pollution. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/921500E7C5A64E0A882571C30048F0C9/$file/0256256.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs are current or former residents of Bougainville. Who allege that they or their family members were the victims of numerous violations of international law as a result of defendant mining corporation Rio Tinto. Which provides that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0335p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> McCartha was employed by Defendant National City Corporation. The Disability Plan is administered by National City. McCartha's subsequent application for short term disability benefits was approved. At that time McCartha was specifically informed that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/054637p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Appellant is 5' 6 </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052788p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm the order of the District Court holding that we lack jurisdiction to review this discretionary determination. We will affirm also the Court's determination that it lacked jurisdiction to hear Appellants' Fifth Amendment due process claims. I. 3 Appellant Wei Zhao is a native and citizen of the People's Republic of China. Which was incorporated in 1996 in the state of New Jersey. Is a wholly owned United States subsidiary of Jilin Ltd. Who was manager of the company's import and export division. The supporting documentation asserted that Zhao was an executive employee of Jilin Ltd. and that he was transferring to Jilin USA in an executive and managerial capacity. The INS ceased to exist as an independent agency within the United States Department of Justice and the INS's functions were transferred to the Department of Homeland Security. The INS was unconvinced that Zhao had been and would be employed in a primarily executive or managerial capacity. Because the record did not indicate that he was the beneficiary of an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=03-4204_017.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was a member of a collective bargaining unit represented by the American Postal Workers Union. He was covered by a national collective bargaining agreement between the APWU and the Postal Service known as the National Agreement. Which certified that his absence was due to fatigue. The inclusive dates you were unable to work. Any medicines you are taking. This medical information is to be reviewed by the Postal Medical Officer. No. 03 4204 3 (2) You may be required to be examined by the Postal Medical Officer after your documentation is reviewed. The bill for this release for work exam will be paid by the Postal Service. She concluded that the information was insufficient to clear him for duty. A medical officer or contract physician evaluates the medical report and makes a medical assessment as to your ability to return to work before you are allowed to return. Were insufficient to clear him for duty because they did not describe the nature of treatment he received or list any medications he was taking. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200606/05-1266b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Adkins were on brief. Was on brief. Were on 2 brief. Before October 2001 Customs was bound under the terms of its 1995 National Inspectional Assignment Policy (NIAP) and a National Labor Agreement (NLA) to bargain with NTEU Chapter 143 (Chapter 143) over changes in rotation and regular days off (RDOs) for its El Paso. Because the FLRA's decision is not arbitrary. The United States Customs Service was a part of the United States Department of the Treasury until the Homeland Security Act of 2002 transferred it to the United States Department of Homeland Security where it was renamed the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection. The agency is permitted but not required to negotiate with the labor organization.' </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=01-1657_042.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This case presents the question whether a foreign national who is not informed of his right to consular notification under Article 36 of the OE Defendants also filed a Petition for Rehearing En Banc. Which was submitted to all judges in regular active service for a vote. Thus that petition is denied. Concluded that the answer was yes. Jogi I also held that the Vienna Convention is a self executing treaty. Since Jogi I was decided. The Court's reference to § 1983 prompted us to request supplemental memoranda in Jogi's case addressing two questions: (1) whether it is necessary to rely on § 1350 for subject matter jurisdiction in a Vienna Convention case. The No. 01 1657 3 parties have submitted their memoranda. We also have the benefit of an amicus curiae submission from the United States. In the interest of avoiding a decision on grounds broader than are necessary to resolve the case. We are persuaded that it is best not to rest subject matter jurisdiction on the ATS. Since it is unclear whether the treaty violation Jogi has alleged amounts to a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0901n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Diamond was 31 years old and a former fast food restaurant cook when he was diagnosed with a variety of heart ailments in 1999. Medical and psychological history Diamond's medical and psychological history is spread over 700 pages of the Administrative Record in this case. The following is a summary of the most relevant points. Diamond was treated for right side abdominal pain at the King's Daughters Medical Center in Ashland. Diamond was later admitted for a cardiac catheterization procedure in early August of that year after complaining of fatigue and edema in his legs. He was diagnosed with alcoholic cardiomyopathy and related heart ailments. Tests revealed that Diamond's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/09/994337P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lowe was not disabled because she was able to perform her past relevant work. Contending that the ALJ failed to support his finding that her subjective complaints were not fully credible. She also argues that the ALJ's conclusion that she can perform her past work was not based on substantial evidence and that. The ALJ's findings compel the conclusion that she cannot work and is therefore disabled. We determine whether the decision is based on legal error. Whether the findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. Lowe's contention that the ALJ failed to support his finding that her subjective complaints were not fully credible. I. The ALJ was required to make an express credibility determination explaining why he did not fully credit Ms. The ALJ may not discount a claimant's complaints solely because they 2 are not fully supported by the objective medical evidence. Credibility findings are for the ALJ to make. Lowe's complaints (particularly her complaints of back pain) were not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011172.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: The question in this case is whether a Chapter 7 debtor's right to receive payments under a privately purchased disability insurance policy is fully exempt from the bankruptcy estate under W. Because we cannot assume that payments under this type of policy will be limited to amounts reasonably necessary for support. We hold that the payments are partially exempt under W. Morehead that the market had moved against his open positions and that the firm was making an $850. Morehead was unable to meet the margin call. Morehead was fired from his position as a surgeon at the Veterans' Administration Hospital in Clarksburg. 4 IN RE MOREHEAD the case was closed. Morehead was receiving payments of $10. They listed the disability policy as an asset but claimed that payments under the policy were fully exempt from the bankruptcy estate under W. He argued that the amendment should be disallowed because the Moreheads' failure to disclose the disability policy in their initial bankruptcy filing was a fraudulent effort to conceal an asset. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/02/97-2140.htm">97-2140 -- DIAMOND BAR CATTLE CO. V. U.S. -- 02/23/1999<BR></A><BR> We affirm. <p> Kit and Sherry Laney are the owners and operators of Diamond Bar Cattle Company and Laney Cattle Company. The Laneys and their predecessors in title have used the lands at issue for cattle grazing since 1883. The companies historically have grazed their cattle on government lands by obtaining grazing permits. The first such permit was issued to plaintiffs' predecessors in title in 1907. Each company offered to pay the requested grazing fees and negotiate a permit that recognized the companies' </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="479"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043120np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2006) OPINION PER CURIAM Jamalud din Almahdi is serving a sentence of imprisonment at FCI Allenwood for a parole violation. His presumptive parole date is March 29. He claimed that his constitutional rights were violated when DHS arbitrarily placed his name on a watch list. When officials at FCI Allenwood placed him in administrative detention at times of elevated national security because his name was on the list. He alleged that he was placed in segregation for over two months in late 2001. His telephone privileges were reduced to once a month. 2 n.2 (noting that they would file another motion to address the merits if the exhaustion defense were unsuccessful). Defendants argued that prisoners have no constitutional right to use a telephone. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We will affirm in part and vacate in part. With the District Court's implicit determination that Almahdi was obligated to exhaust his claim insofar as he alleged that his constitutional rights were violated when DHS improperly placed his name on a watch list. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E2741208DC23B52588256A080061AC26/$file/9916021.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Although these tips are paid by customers directly to employees. Federal law deems them to have been paid by the employer for purposes of FICA taxes. This puts employers in an awkward position: They are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/08/963032P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Grebenick was not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-1085.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Claim a competing property interest in any of the land. (1) Phelps Dodge is the ultimate parent company of MEMCO. <hr> The BLM determined that nine of MEMCO's claims satisfied patent requirements. The district court held that third parties who claim no ownership interest in the land subject to a mineral patent cannot challenge the issuance or validity of the patent under the 1872 Mining Law and have no right to relief under the APA. Is a matter of first impression. The Plaintiffs' second claim (FOIA) against the BLM is still pending in the district court and is not the subject of this appeal. <hr> subject matter jurisdiction. P. 12(b)(1) or 12(b)(6) is reviewed de novo). B. Subject Matter Jurisdiction Federal Appellees It is well settled that the Plaintiffs can only sue the BLM to the extent it waived its sovereign immunity. 1331 will only confer subject matter jurisdiction where some other statute provides such a waiver. Is entitled to judicial review thereof. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/9_opinions/92-5164.html">WINSTAR V. U.S.<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/033404p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> DE NN IS RE MP . LOU IS REYES. CU RT IS ST IE LY . TH EO DO RE LEW IS. F R ANC IS M . Contending that Appellants' claims were completely preempted by § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=09&date=01&year=99">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jan1998/98a1786p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Wynn was also convicted of wire fraud. Two questions whether the indictment contained duplicitous counts and whether investor reliance is a requisite of proof to convict under section 10(b) of the Securities Act of 1934 require discussion. Are without merit and do not warrant further discussion.1 1. His right to a fair trial was prejudiced by the district court's denial of his motion for a separate trial. Making baseless arguments that certain assumptions were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C19F4081B980E89988256E5A00707A80/$file/9916021.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Although these tips are paid by customers directly to employees. Federal law deems them to have been paid by the employer for purposes of FICA taxes. This puts employers in an awkward position: They are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=07&date=01&year=00">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1417.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was on brief for petitioner.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1159.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Prevett</SPAN> and the <SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=03-3207_008.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. BACKGROUND Frank Bros. is a construction company with its principal place of business in Janesville. Which were funded by capital from both federal and state agencies through the provisions of the Federal Aid Highway Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="477"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/07/963501P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Taylor was 38 years old and had a high school degree. Except for a three year period that Taylor took off to give birth to a child and to have back surgery. Taylor started to have problems with her back during the 1980's. One issue before the ALJ was whether Taylor was a disabled individual under Title II of the Act beginning March 15. Another issue was whether. She was a disabled individual under the provisions of Title XVI of the Act. 2 1 defines pseudarthrosis as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1992.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom Visconti & Boren Ltd. was on brief for petitioners. Were on brief for respondent. It arises out of the actions of various employers alleged to have violated the National Labor Relations Act. Satisfied that the Board made the necessary additional findings and that those findings are supported by substantial evidence. I. Acme Tile and Terrazzo Co. and Roman Tile and Terrazzo ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F3398DF0F5B7CAC288256D5E00785FB2/$file/0136172.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Save Our Valley argues that the project will have the effect of discriminating against Rainier Valley residents based on race in violation of a Department of Transportation regulation. The primary question before us is whether that Department of Transportation regulation creates an individual federal right that can be enforced under the Civil Rights Act. I The Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-3186.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jesus Rios Zamora was charged with one count of being found illegally in the United States after having been deported. Arguing that the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the attendant transfer of certain immigration related responsibilities from the (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Rios Zamora contends that the indictment (1) charged him with an additional element offense that is not in the statute (the failure to obtain the <hr> advance consent of the Secretary of Homeland Security for readmission to the United States). Is therefore unconstitutionally vague. (3) charged him with conduct that he was incapable of committing. Or when the sufficiency of a charge is challenged. That is. A person who is not a citizen or national of the United States. Was knowingly and unlawfully found in the United States without obtaining advance consent from the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security for readmission to the United States after having been convicted of an aggravated felony and having been deported from the United States on or about August 5. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/99opinions/99-5307e.html">JENNIFER K. HARBURY V. JOHN DEUTCH<BR></A><BR> It is <span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-5079.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Allows the district court to award attorney's fees to claimant's counsel when the court remands a Title II Social Security disability case for further proceedings and the Commissioner ultimately determines that the claimant is entitled to an award of past due benefits. McGraw's application for benefits was denied at the agency level by both the administrative law judge (ALJ) and the Appeals Council. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <hr> 636(c). McGraw's original benefits hearing was defective and a complete record of the administrative proceedings could not be prepared. McGraw was entitled to past due benefits in the amount of $46. Determined that the Plaintiff was entitled to past due benefits. Not the (1) </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-1127a.html">SEATTLE OPERA V. NLRB<BR></A><BR> Lemly was on brief. <span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001987.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Systems 4 is a Maryland corporation in the business of engineering and installing building automation systems to control heating. Is the U.S. subsidiary of a foreign corporation and is in the business of designing. The National Gallery emphasized that the proposals should clearly define the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0319n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the Commissioner's conclusion that Potter is not disabled is supported by substantial evidence. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. Potter claimed that she was unable to work because of her learning disability.1 Potter received a hearing before an ALJ in 2005. The ALJ found that Potter's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0101n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Templeton contends that there was not substantial evidence to support the ALJ's conclusion that he retained the capacity to perform unskilled light work that allowed for frequent postural changes. Which it is undisputed he could no longer perform. Plaintiff maintained that he was disabled due to a herniated disc at L5 S1 and constant pain in his lower back radiating down both legs. His application was denied initially and on reconsideration. A hearing was held before an ALJ on February 3. The ALJ found that plaintiff had demonstrated a severe impairment that was expected to last more than 12 months which would preclude him from performing his past relevant work. The ALJ concluded that plaintiff was not disabled under the Social Security Act. Cross motions for summary judgment were filed. Which was also denied. No. 06 5545 3 A five step sequential process is used to determine whether a claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. Then the burden shifts to the Commissioner to establish that there are a significant number of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0896n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. DeBoard was almost 37 years old at the time she filed the application at issue herein. The application was denied and she did not appeal that denial. The application was denied initially. The motion for reconsideration was denied because the Administrative Law Judge found that DeBoard retained the residual functional capacity. Contending that the Commissioner's finding that she was not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july98/97-8432.man.html">YANG V. GOV'T EMPLOYEES INS. CO. (7/22/1998, NO. 97-8432)<BR></A><BR> Holding that GEICO's conduct was not subject to FCRA restrictions because the document GEICO obtained regarding the Yangs was not a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july96/94-2234.opa.html">WOLFE V. CHATER<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Wolfe v. We also find that the district court erred by not finding that there was insufficient evidence for the ALJ to hold that the claimant's educational level was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199712/97-1218a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Steven A. With him on the brief were William E. General Counsel at the time the brief was filed. With him on the brief was Evan M. Are posed by a provision in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. 1996 unless the company was already in that market. I There is no need to repeat the description. 000 customers and is the second largest provider of alarm services in the country. We are con cerned here with 47 U.S.C. s 275(a): (a) Delayed entry into alarm monitoring (1) Prohibition No Bell operating company or affiliate thereof shall engage in the provision of alarm monitoring services before the date which is 5 years after February 8. Of alarm monitoring services by a Bell operating company that was engaged in providing alarm monitoring services as of November 30. Asked the Federal Communica tions Commission to issue an order to show cause why Ameritech's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar2001/99-15411.man.html">DOUGHTY V. APFEL (3/28/2001, NO. 99-15411)<BR></A><BR> Doughty was denied benefits pursuant to the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july98/97-8432.man.html">YANG V. GOV'T EMPLOYEES INS. CO. (7/22/1998, NO. 97-8432)<BR></A><BR> Holding that GEICO's conduct was not subject to FCRA restrictions because the document GEICO obtained regarding the Yangs was not a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200307/02-5003a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july96/94-2234.opa.html">WOLFE V. CHATER<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Wolfe v. We also find that the district court erred by not finding that there was insufficient evidence for the ALJ to hold that the claimant's educational level was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200507/04-1137a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Adkins were on brief. Were on brief. 2 Peter D. Were on brief for the intervenor. Assuming arguendo that Customs in fact exercised its managements right in implementing the revised At the time this suit was initiated. The Customs Service was a bureau within the Treasury Department. Whereupon it was renamed the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection. Customs was not obligated to bargain over the NTEU's ground rule proposal. Which are permissive subjects of bargaining. Are not unqualified. (2) procedures which management officials of the agency will observe in exercising any authority under this section. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Apr2001/995647.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will dismiss Salovaara's appeal with regard to Jackson because it is moot and will affirm the dismissal order regarding Salovaara's complaint against Lazard Freres & Co. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. The plaintiff appellant in this case is Mikael Salovaara. The claims that Salovaara brought in his individual capacity have since been dismissed. SSP Partners and SSP Advisors (collectively </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/063555np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm. Because the background is familiar to the parties. We will not discuss it at length. His application was denied at the initial and reconsideration levels of review. An Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/09/04-7010.htm">04-7010 -- HEARD V. BARNHART -- 09/27/2004<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> <p> Plaintiff appellant Nicky Heard appeals from an order of the district court affirming the Commissioner's decision to deny his application for Social Security disability and Supplemental Security Income benefits (SSI). When he was 36. <a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb2000/986368.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> F&D asserts that the district court's ruling on the discovery issue is correct. It is entitled to summary judgment because the loss City Federal sustained is not covered by the bond. We will reverse the district court's order of summary judgment. In view of the circumstance that all of the relevant deposition testimony is not in the record before this court. We have relied on those factual statements and other portions of the record in deciding this appeal. To the extent that the parties' briefs indicate that there are disputed facts. We will refer to the RTC's version because we must view the facts in the light most favorable to it. Because this appeal is intensely fact driven. It is necessary to set forth the factual background in some detail. City Collateral was City Federal's mortgage warehouse lending operation.3 Among other things. Lyndon Merkle ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jan1996/95a1238p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This consolidated class action is brought pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. We conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the defendants breached section 1104(a)'s fiduciary duties and as to whether the defendants are entitled to section 1104(c)'s protection. We will. Vacate the district court's grant of summary judgment in the defendants' favor and will remand the case to the district court for further proceedings. Each plan permitted an employee to contribute a percentage of his or her compensation into an individual account and to direct that it be invested in any one or a number of funds that were comprised of different types of investments. A GIC is a contract under which the issuer is obligated to repay the principal deposit at a designated future date and to pay interest at a specified rate over the duration of the contract. The Sperry Plan and the BEST Plan were consolidated to form the Unisys Savings Plan. Was closed to new contributions. Assets invested in the Fixed Income Fund were reinvested in the new Insurance Contract Fund. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052676np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge James Titterington is forty four. An Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052351p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the DOC is unable to show that its ten book policy is the least restrictive means to further its compelling governmental interest in the safety and health of prisoners and prison employees. We will reverse the District Court's order dismissing Washington's RLUIPA claim and remand with instructions to consider whether any factual issues remain when that claim is evaluated under the proper legal standard. I. Henry Unseld Washington is an inmate in the custody of the Pennsylvania DOC who has attempted to practice his religion while incarcerated. Washington's Church states that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/April2004/033775np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history. We will affirm the decision of the District Court upholding the Commissioner's denial of benefits. I. The District Court had jurisdiction to review the Commissioner's final determination under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and we have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Our review of the Commissioner's final decision to deny benefits is limited to a determination of whether that decision is supported by substantial evidence. Both types of benefits Garcia seeks are only available if. Garcia is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/05/032813P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Arguing that he is disabled and that the ALJ underestimated the severity of his mental illness. Sultan's mental illness dates to at least 1993 when he was hospitalized after threatening his mother with a knife. Although Sultan's prognosis was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/95opinions/95-3356.html">KING V. ALSTON AND MSPB<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1447.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Winsor LLP</U> were on brief pro se.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1293.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellant.</P> <BR WP= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1006.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Cummings & Lockwood were on brief for petitioner. Maskele and Moriarty were on brief for respondent. The only issue before this Court is whether the Board had substantial record evidence to conclude that certain of the Company's employees. Are neither </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CC2D8FCD64CA85F5882572D8004CCC17/$file/0555201.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Consistent with other circuits that have considered this question. 1 the ALJ found that Massachi was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act because he could adjust to other work. Carry out simple one or two step instructions was intact. Carry out extensive or complex instructions was impaired and that his ability to maintain concentration and attention throughout the interview was mildly impaired. Parikh concluded that Massachi would not be able to respond appropriately to the usual work settings in such matters as attendance and would have a hard time adjusting to changes in the work routine because of his depression and poor concentration. To determine whether or not a claimant is disabled. If the ALJ finds that a claimant is either disabled or not disabled at any step. The ALJ asked Tracy a hypothetical question about whether an individual of Massachi's age and education who was limited to simple tasks because of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="472"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar2001/99-15411.man.html">DOUGHTY V. APFEL (3/28/2001, NO. 99-15411)<BR></A><BR> Doughty was denied benefits pursuant to the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2000/99-11385.man.html">COALITION FOR THE ABOLITION OF MARIJUANA PROHIBITION V. CITY OF ATLANTA (7/27/2000, NO. 99-11385)<BR></A><BR> The appellants appeal the district court's determination that portions of the festival ordinance were constitutional. We AFFIRM the holding of the district court.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/04/961046P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Dittrich is a trucking company incorporated in Minnesota. With its Zappia is a trucking company chief executive office also in incorporated Minnesota. Zappia's name is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7F10399F447011D388256D980059DA50/$file/0117049.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: Delete Footnote 4. Praying for relief under California's Unfair Competition Law ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/199911385.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The appellants appeal the district court's determination that portions of the festival ordinance were constitutional. BACKGROUND CAMP is a non profit organization focused primarily on forming alliances and associating with other groups concerned with marijuana issues. It now fell within the 1994 Festival Ordinance's definition of an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0293n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiff's Medical History Plaintiff was born on October 23. He is a high school graduate and has worked as a delivery driver and machine operator. I am doubtful he will be able to return to any type of gainful employment. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2437.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. LLP</SPAN> were on brief. Plaintiff George Goodman challenges the district court's rulings on two motions for judgment as a matter of law and contends that the jury instructions on his breach of contract claim were erroneous. The specifics of the encounter were hotly disputed in the student disciplinary proceedings that followed. It was uncontested. It was also established that Goodman struck Lee in the face several times. Ultimately Goodman was dismissed from the school.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/61BCA5069D837B2688256A31005B4E7A/$file/0016090.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Massanari is substituted for Kenneth S. The SSA explained that it </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/064106p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm in part. 51 were released in full. Four were withheld in part. Two were withheld in their entirety. Two pages were determined to be non responsive and one document was released with certain redactions. Abdelfattah filed a series of complaints in the District Court alleging that his FOIA requests were not timely processed. That the searches were inadequate. That certain information in the responsive documents was improperly withheld. These actions were eventually consolidated and the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/918203EF0C43575888256E5A00707AF0/$file/0016090.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Massanari is substituted for Kenneth S. The SSA explained that it </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7949A3E48BDCFB2F88256DA90052E74F/$file/0117049.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ORDER The parties' joint motion for corrections to opinion is GRANTED. Is further amended as follows: 1. Replace the last sentence of the last paragraph beginning: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/199911385.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The appellants appeal the district court's determination that portions of the festival ordinance were constitutional. BACKGROUND CAMP is a non profit organization focused primarily on forming alliances and associating with other groups concerned with marijuana issues. Their application was denied because the City determined that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19956429.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BCBSA is immune from liability to the United States for payments its officers certify and disburse to Medicare beneficiaries. Analyzing both the context within which the subsection is made applicable to the Medicare Act. The Supreme Court cases that have construed it. Body was an employee of appellee Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama from 1973 to 1989. Including: The Medicare program is administered by the Health Care Finance Administration (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2FF47A06B5F73CE888256D8A007D450D/$file/0117049.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Praying for relief under California's Unfair Competition Law ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19956429.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BCBSA is immune from liability to the United States for payments its officers certify and disburse to Medicare beneficiaries. Analyzing both the context within which the subsection is made applicable to the Medicare Act. The Supreme Court cases that have construed it. Body was an employee of appellee Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama from 1973 to 1989. Issues The Medicare program is administered by the Health Care Finance Administration (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2000/99-11385.man.html">COALITION FOR THE ABOLITION OF MARIJUANA PROHIBITION V. CITY OF ATLANTA (7/27/2000, NO. 99-11385)<BR></A><BR> The appellants appeal the district court's determination that portions of the festival ordinance were constitutional. We AFFIRM the holding of the district court.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/May2002/013356up.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Appeals the District Court's order affirming the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security that Dearth is not entitled to Supplemental Security Income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. Dearth claims that the Commissioner's decision was not supported by substantial evidence. We disagree and will affirm. We are limited to determining whether the Commissioner's final decision is supported by substantial evidence. 360 (3d Cir. 1999). 42 </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0418p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Trustees of the United Mine Workers of America Combined Benefit Fund (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/02opinions/02-1560.html">VERNON F. MINTON V. NASD<BR></A><BR> Argued for plaintiff appellant.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>On the brief was <u>Jerry W. Argued for defendants appellees.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>With him on the brief was <u>Gregory C. Mathis</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>Of counsel on the brief were <u>Daniel Joseph</u> and <u>Beth H. 643 is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) because it claims subject matter that was on sale more than one year prior to the filing of his patent application.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span><u>Minton v. Line height:200%'>BACKGROUND</p> <p class=MsoBodyText2>Minton is the sole inventor and owner of the 643 patent. Which is directed to a computerized securities trading system.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>When using the system. Individuals connect to a computer network through which they are able to post offers to trade securities as well as to select and reply to posted offers to cause trades to occur.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'>  </span>More specifically. Which is representative. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/11/99-2081.htm">99-2081 -- AG SERVICES OF AMERICA INC. V. NIELSEN -- 11/06/2000<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011163.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 6 the two section symbols added in the earlier amending order are deleted. ANILCA </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/08/943714P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Will support the use of the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june98/95-6429.man.html">UNITED STATES V. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF ALA.(6/26/1998, NO. 95-6429)<BR></A><BR> BCBSA is immune from liability to the United States for payments its officers certify and disburse to Medicare beneficiaries.</P> <P> In part I. Analyzing both the context within which the subsection is made applicable to the Medicare Act. The Supreme Court cases that have construed it. Body was an employee of appellee Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama from 1973 to 1989. Issued in the form of Administrative Bulletins.</P> <P> Body was employed as a senior auditor by BCBSA in 1984. Was assigned to audit the 1983 cost reports of. Reversed his proposed adjustments.</P> <P> Body contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation in January 1989 to report BCBSA's reimbursements to Alabama hospitals of interest costs that he felt were not authorized under Medicare regulations. The OIG concluded that four of the fourteen adjustments were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1763.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for defendants Nancy Mayer and Retirement Board of the Employees' Retirement System of the State of Rhode Island and Joann Flaminio in her capacity as Executive Director. McIntyre & Tate were on brief for plaintiffs National Education Association Rhode Island. Gursky with whom Gursky Law Associates was on brief for plaintiff Richard R. The retirement system is administered by the Retirement Board ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/feb95/99-11385.man.html">COALITION FOR THE ABOLITION OF MARIJUANA PROHIBITION V. CITY OF ATLANTA (7/27/2000, NO. 99-11385)<BR></A><BR> The appellants appeal the district court's determination that portions of the festival ordinance were constitutional. We AFFIRM the holding of the district court.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-1066.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This matter is before the court on the Commissioner of Social Security's petition for panel rehearing. A copy of the amended opinion is attached to this order. Plaintiff Elizabeth Hackett is appealing the order entered by the district court denying her application for an award of reasonable attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). She is therefore a prevailing party for purposes of EAJA. Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees from the United States </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june98/95-6429.man.html">UNITED STATES V. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF ALA.(6/26/1998, NO. 95-6429)<BR></A><BR> BCBSA is immune from liability to the United States for payments its officers certify and disburse to Medicare beneficiaries.</P> <P> In part I. Analyzing both the context within which the subsection is made applicable to the Medicare Act. The Supreme Court cases that have construed it. Body was an employee of appellee Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama from 1973 to 1989. Issued in the form of Administrative Bulletins.</P> <P> Body was employed as a senior auditor by BCBSA in 1984. Was assigned to audit the 1983 cost reports of. Reversed his proposed adjustments.</P> <P> Body contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation in January 1989 to report BCBSA's reimbursements to Alabama hospitals of interest costs that he felt were not authorized under Medicare regulations. The OIG concluded that four of the fourteen adjustments were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1613.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C.</SPAN> were on brief for appellants.</P> <P> <SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//feb95/99-11385.man.html">COALITION FOR THE ABOLITION OF MARIJUANA PROHIBITION V. CITY OF ATLANTA (7/27/2000, NO. 99-11385)<BR></A><BR> The appellants appeal the district court's determination that portions of the festival ordinance were constitutional. We AFFIRM the holding of the district court.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=04&date=01&year=00">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-5069a.html">MICHAEL H. HOLLAND V. NATIONAL MINING ASSN<BR></A><BR> Argued the cause for federal appellant.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTUyOTUtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5295-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Granting defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint on the ground that defendant Tower Semiconductor Ltd. is a foreign private issuer exempt from Rule 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by virtue of Exchange Act Rule 3a12 3(b). The complaint alleges that a Tower proxy statement issued by defendants was materially misleading and therefore </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="466"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTUyOTUtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-3823-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Granting defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint on the ground that defendant Tower Semiconductor Ltd. is a foreign private issuer exempt from Rule 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by virtue of Exchange Act Rule 3a12 3(b). The complaint alleges that a Tower proxy statement issued by defendants was materially misleading and therefore </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/012459.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That there are a significant number of jobs in the national economy that Walls can perform. The ALJ concluded that Walls is not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act (the Act). Social Security Ruling (SSR or Ruling) 83 12 recognizes that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/022.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: Petitioner Mir Aimal Kasi was convicted by a Virginia state court jury of capital murder. Related firearm charges arising out of the slaying of two Central Intelligence Agency ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5491630079AE107E88256A6C005838EE/$file/9936095.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is substituted for his predecessor. Was injured on the job in 1986. Ball was also an alcoholic. Ball's SSI claim was approved. Was denied at the initial and reconsideration levels. The ALJ determined that additional medical information was needed and arranged for a consultative psychological evaluation. The evaluation was conducted by Charles Regets. Ball was also evaluated by the Eugenia Center on October 11. The amendment provides: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0461p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the FAA reasonably interpreted the waiver provision and because the Air Show's other challenges to the waiver decision are unconvincing. The Administrator also may enact regulations and orders without notice or formal rulemaking when </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-2079.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> LLP</SPAN> were on brief. Holt</SPAN> was on brief. Emblematic of unsettled political conditions that have plagued the Middle East for many years. On the ground that they were entitled to a binding determination of sovereign immunity (including appellate review of any unfavorable decision) before being forced to bear the burdens of litigation.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2143.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Were on brief. Vinick appeals the district court's determination that he personally is liable for withholding taxes that Jefferson Bronze. Previously this court vacated a determination that Vinick was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-4762_011.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> In many instances the dealership's president forged customers' signatures on leases that were fabricated or altered. 06 1144 & 06 2044 policy Cincinnati had issued to the Bank was similar but not identical to an outdated version of the standard Bankers Blanket Bond. Because the Cincinnati policy covers the Bank's losses and statutory interest was properly denied. I. Background First National Bank of Manitowoc is a national bank headquartered in Manitowoc. Kust would call the Bank or fax it the lease terms and wait for the Bank's approval.1 Once the lease was approved (sometimes several days later). Including a business 1 Manitowoc is a small community. So many of the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2004/033070np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This appeal raises the question of whether substantial evidence supports the finding of the Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0301n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> His application for benefits was denied initially and upon reconsideration. The ALJ determined that Baranich was not disabled. 1999.1 Baranich stated that his ability to work was limited due to the effects of a quadruple bypass and other heart conditions. Baranich's application for benefits was denied initially and upon reconsideration. The key evidence before the ALJ was as follows. He was under the care of cardiologist Dr. Noble wrote in his notes that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1994/94a0831p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lawrence Seidman ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/June2004/033367np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lane appeals the district court's decision affirming the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security that Lane was not entitled to Disability Insurance Benefits ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-7029.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. His application was ultimately denied by an administrative law judge (ALJ) and he did not appeal that decision. The ALJ found that it did not prevent him from performing other work that is available in the national economy. The ALJ's decision is the Commissioner's final decision for purposes of this appeal. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-1026a.html">ONEIDA MTR FRGHT INC V. ICC<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3BCCF0E298BF873C88256E5A00707B9B/$file/9936095.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is substituted for his predecessor. Was injured on the job in 1986. Ball was also an alcoholic. Ball's SSI claim was approved. Was denied at the initial and reconsideration levels. The ALJ determined that additional medical information was needed and arranged for a consultative psychological evaluation. The evaluation was conducted by Charles Regets. Ball was also evaluated by the Eugenia Center on October 11. The amendment provides: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/07/031371P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> She was not disabled. Because the decision is supported by substantial evidence. She claimed that she quit this job because she was experiencing shoulder pain. Charles said she left this job because it was too strenuous. Was fifty two years old when the ALJ denied her application for benefits.2 Charles's claim alleged she had been disabled since April 15. Was able to care for her personal hygiene. Was able to wash dishes. Were difficult. Charles reported that a workers' compensation claim related to her injuries was still pending. She continued to work until she was laid off in 1995. Ford commented that thyroid disease </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/April2004/033172np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Commissioner held that Facyson was not statutorily disabled and hence was not entitled to disability insurance benefits or supplemental social security income under the Social Security Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="464"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001746.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> TRAENKLE Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The United States Marshal also was directed to sell the Honey Bear. Copies of the judgments and notice of the impending sale were sent to the Traenkles. The final deficiency judgment was not entitled to full faith and credit. The case was closed administratively on February 11. MNB's motion for summary judgment was denied as to the breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing counterclaim. The Traenkles contended that MNB breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing by damaging the Honey Bear and allowing its condition to deteriorate while the boat was in MNB's possession prior to its sale. Commercial Law § 9 504(3) (1997) bars MNB from obtaining a deficiency judgment and that MNB should be deemed to have accepted the Honey Bear in full satisfaction of the Traenkle's obligation pursuant to Maryland Code Annotated. The district court found that the notice provision of § 9 504(3) did not apply because the Honey Bear was sold pursuant to the Ship Mortgage Act. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1995/95a1115p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue presented is whether the monies expended by the tenant before bankruptcy can be recouped or otherwise credited against rental payments due thereafter. Landlord Flagstaff Realty Associates was obligated to maintain the parking area and exterior of the building in good repair. The specific bases for rejection were that the rent provided in the lease was below market value and that tenant had asserted a claim for $477. We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 158(d) and 1291 (West 1993). There are no disputes as to the material facts. Our first inquiry is what rent is reserved under the lease. Pa. 1989)( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1266.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Garin</SPAN> were on the brief. Were on the brief. Plaintiffs are active duty members of the military. Plaintiffs argue that the October Resolution is constitutionally inadequate to authorize the military offensive that defendants are now planning against Iraq. <SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2000/993357.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The United States contends on appeal that the National Park Service's decision not to repair or improve the drainage ditch and head wall was a legitimate exercise of governmental discretion and thus not actionable under the FTCA. We agree with the government and will reverse. Highway Route 209 runs through the Recreation Area and was designed. Since the time the roadway was received from Pennsylvania. Which was 3 explicitly intended as an alternative to Route 209. Congress provided that all commercial traffic not connected with the Recreation Area itself will be barred from Route 209 as of September 30. The Service conducted an engineering study of the roads in the Recreation Area in 1986 that identified numerous bridges that were in need of reconstruction because of structural deficiencies. Reported that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=06&date=01&year=02">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/199915411.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Doughty was denied benefits pursuant to the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Nov2003/032539u.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Carmon was capable of returning to work. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and will vacate the order of the District Court. I. Because this opinion is not precedential. We will recite only those facts relevant to disposition. Sick with what he thought was the flu. Carmon was admitted to the hospital and spent the better part of the following two months there. Carmon was treated </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200206/01-1127a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lemly was on brief. Were on brief. The Board held that the Opera's refusal to bargain with the American Guild of Musical Artists (Union) after the Union was certified as the collective bargaining representa tive of an allegedly appropriate unit of the Opera's employ ees constituted an unfair labor practice (ULP) under section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act (Act). It contests the Board's conclusion that the Opera's auxiliary choristers are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/199915411.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Doughty was denied benefits pursuant to the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/10/97-6430.htm">97-6430 -- PAYNE V. CLARENDON NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. -- 10/26/1999<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> This case arises out of the efforts of the liquidating trustee in the Chapter . The referral to the bankruptcy court was withdrawn and the case was transferred back to the district court. Having obtained a certification from the district court that the summary judgment for FNB was final and appealable under Fed. Affirm. <p> The Bonding Companies are in the business of providing reclamation performance bonds to coal mining operations for the benefit of state and federal governments. Their servicing agent is Van American. No payments were made on any of the bonds until January 1992. 547(b). <p> At issue in this appeal are three of the transfers. Which were made to the Bonding Companies via letters of credit. Co obligors are required to contribute. Once the trustee establishes the transfers are preferential and avoidable. The entities for whose benefit the transfers were made. <em>See</em> 11 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/08/98-3102.htm">98-3102 -- MARTIN V. STATE OF KANSAS -- 08/19/1999<BR></A><BR> We affirm. <p align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971668.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. OPINION PER CURIAM: Introduction This matter is before the Court on appeal of the district court's granting of summary judgment in favor of defendant on Counts I. Where Rodriguez failed to show that he was subjected to disparate treatment because of his national origin. 2. Whether the district court correctly determined that Rodriguez was not unlawfully terminated because the evidence showed that he threatened the life of his supervisor. 3. Whether the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant on plaintiff's retaliation claim where there was no evidence from which a jury could reasonably find that the defendant's legitimate business reason for terminating Rodriguez was pretextual. 2 Procedural History Rodriguez filed an EEO complaint with the NIST Office on June 1. He alleged that he was discriminated against on the basis of his national origin during his brief period of employment at NIST. At that time there were no persons of Hispanic origin on NIST's custodial staff. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/09/003935P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Appellees were convicted of unrelated drug offenses. I. BACKGROUND Lopez Salas was born in Mexico. He was arrested on multiple drug charges and ultimately pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute cocaine and methamphetamine. Ramos was also born in Mexico. His parents brought him to the United States when he was five. His current conviction is pursuant to a guilty plea on a charge of intent to distribute methamphetamine. They are not eligible for several statutory benefits. Deportable aliens are not eligible for assignment to minimum security facilities. Concluded the appellees were denied benefits solely on the basis of their status as deportable aliens. Finding this effect was not contemplated in the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Ramos was subject to a guidelines range of 168 to 210 months. After the departure they were sentenced to 156 months (thirteen years) and 96 months (eight years) respectively. ANALYSIS We will reverse a district court's decision to depart downward from the guidelines only for an abuse of discretion. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="461"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200116424.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The court further determined that the action was barred by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA). Because we determine that the action was preempted by the SLUSA and subject to dismissal. Which was styled as a class action. He alleged that the defendants sold him and the class members Class B shares in the growth fund when they were unknowingly eligible to purchase Class A shares. Because the Class B shares were subject to higher fees and commissions than the Class A shares. He argued that the SLUSA was no longer applicable to his claims and filed a motion to remand the case to state court. Whether an action raises a federal question </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200006/99-1517a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Constantine G. With him on the brief were David W. With him on the brief were E. The Union claims that: (1) the Mar Ad's decision was arbitrary and capricious. (3) s 9 of the Shipping Act is an unconsti tutional delegation of legislative authority. In all other respects we deny the petition: MEBA did not properly raise its Fifth Amendment argument and s 9 of the Shipping Act is not an unconstitu tional delegation of authority. 000 gross tons or more. (1) Applications for approval of Transfer to foreign regis try and flag ... of Documented Vessels or vessels the last documentation of which was under the laws of the United States and which are of 1. 000 gross tons or more will be evaluated in light of (i) The type. In its decision the MarAd canvassed the arguments put forth in the comments and determined that the following regulatory criteria were relevant to its decision: (1) the general condition of the vessels. Which are used to ship liquified natural gas. Are in good working condition. (2) The agency has previously found the Republic of the Marshall Islands to be an acceptable transferee. (3) The Department of Defense. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/01/96-3034.htm">96-3034 -- LAW V. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION -- 01/23/1998<BR></A><BR> Background</strong> <p> The NCAA is a voluntary unincorporated association of approximately 1. The NCAA aims to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTAzMjUtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-0325-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were mostly on the losing side of a hardfought union election. Arguing that (1) because the plaintiffs' state law defamation claims were socalled minor disputes under the Railway Labor Act (RLA). (2) because the RLA preempts state law claims that are minor disputes. We do not reach the question whether the plaintiffs' state law claims are the type of socalled minor disputes that. Are within the exclusive primary jurisdiction of arbitral panels established pursuant to the RLA. Voting in the union elections took place while the plaintiffs were suspended. Count 1 also alleged that American was liable for the defamation because it allowed the fliers to remain on a company bulletin board. Such disputes are known as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/08/066009P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Bankruptcy Judge This is an appeal and cross appeal from a Judgment of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nebraska issued on February 3. We will deal with these issues seriatim. 2 I. The Events Leading up to the Debtors' Bankruptcy Filing and Foreclosure Schropp and Dahlke were partners in thirteen commercial real estate partnerships with Prime Realty. McCart and Prime Realty are collectively referred to as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200607/04-7149a.pdf">O:\2005-2006 TERM\09-26-05 SITTING\04-7149 NOVAK V. CAPTL MGMT CORP\OPINION\04-7149 OPINION DRAFT 19.WPD<BR></A><BR> With him on the briefs were Jonathan E. Circuit Judge: Twelve to fifteen thugs criminally attacked and permanently injured appellants Dominic Novak and George Valdivia as they were leaving a bar and dance club in the District of Columbia. The attack occurred late at night in an alley that was immediately outside the only exit from the club and was the most common path for departing patrons. The District Court concluded there was no such duty because the club did not exercise </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar1995/95a1002p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an appeal from an order of the district court made final pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Arguing that the partial settlement was unfair and prejudicial to them. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. FACTS International Thoroughbred Breeders ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=01-1657_018.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jogi is an Indian citizen who was charged with aggravated battery with a firearm in Champaign County. He was removed from the United States and returned to India. Nor is there any hint that the Champaign County law enforcement officials ever contacted the Indian consulate on their own initiative on Jogi's behalf. At some point after Jogi was in prison. The only one that is pertinent for our purposes is his present case. It concluded that Jogi's allegations were insufficient to trigger subject matter jurisdiction under the ATS. Which was not available at the time the district court ruled. He was charged in Champaign County. Jogi's mother were present. That Jogi was Indian. He was released after serving six years. At no time was Jogi ever informed of his right to contact the Indian consulate. He attached an affidavit asserting that he 4 No. 01 1657 was unaware of his Vienna Convention rights and that he would have contacted the Indian consulate to avail himself of its assistance with the Champaign County prosecution had he been informed of his right to do so. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/022866p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The novel issue for this Court is whether we may review a decision of the RRB refusing to reopen a prior claim for benefits after the time for administrative appeal has expired. Because a decision of the RRB refusing to reopen a prior claim is not a final decision within the meaning of 45 U.S.C. § 355(f). We conclude that we have no jurisdiction to review the RRB's decision. We will dismiss the petition. Cunningham was also awarded sickness insurance benefits for the period November 19. Was denied sickness insurance benefits for the period prior to November 19. Both of which were denied on March 7. The Speakman letter­are not properly before this Court. We note that the letters are part of the Certified Administrative Record filed with this Court on August 1. Which was treated as a request to reopen her claim in view of the Bureau's October 2. Cunningham argued that good cause existed to waive the 60 day appeal period because she was prevented from timely appealing the Bureau's decision within the prescribed period because of her medical condition. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="459"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043959np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> She was the victim of sexual harassment. Asserting that Reiser was a federal employee under the provisions of the National Guard Technical Act of 1968 (NGTA). Which was denied. While Reiser was a federal employee. Alleging that the United States was Reiser's actual employer under the clear terms of the N