Search the opinions of the US Circuit Courts of Appeal

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 press returned 4380 results.

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

	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: We are confronted in this case with a tension between two issues of critical constitutional concern: the need to protect the confidentiality of jurors' deliberations while. Guaranteeing the right of the press and the public to have access to court proceedings. We will. We will reverse in part and affirm in part the restrictions imposed by the district court on the conduct of juror interviews. We find that the sealing of the transcript was accomplished prematurely. It was done without adequate notice. We further find that the restrictions imposed on the use of juror information at the time of the unsealing were not supported by an actual or potential threat either of juror harassment or of invasion of the deliberative process as it was taking place. Nor do we intend to suggest that the restrictions which we find to have been improperly imposed here may not be permissible in some future case. There are. Is directly controlling. That the presumptive right of access applied to the voir dire proceedings as they were recorded in the trial transcript.[fn1] Applying the requirement that detailed findings of the need for restrictions be made before any restriction is imposed.
	CREO PRODUCTS, INC V. PRESSTEK Argued for plaintiff appellant.
	OPINION/ORDER The other defendants then settled with Goss and are no longer parties to this lawsuit. Goss's claims against TKS were tried to a jury. (5) sufficient evidence does not support the jury's verdict that TKS dumped products onto the United States printing press market that were comparable to the products TKS sold in Japan. Because Goss's claims against TKS were pending at the time Congress repealed the 1916 Act. A typical large printing press system is over 100 feet long. Once a large printing press is installed. It oftentimes is referred to as an installed base. Is so large and expensive. This is often referred to as the installed base advantage. Price is the primary factor. The United States market for large printing press equipment is rather small. Because the market is so compact. Goss was the only domestic manufacturer of large printing presses in the United States. Goss noticed TKS was a major foreign competitor in the United States market. All of these sales were dumped. They were
	OPINION/ORDER Zimmerman were on brief. P.A. was on brief. These are cross appeals in a Title VII religious discrimination case. The sum of which was reduced to the statutory cap of $300. Johnson was repeatedly harassed over the course of his nine year employment in Spencer Press's janitorial department by his supervisor. Arguing that the evidence did not show that the harassment was because of Johnson's religion and did not show that it was severe and pervasive. We reject these contentions and affirm. Johnson cross appeals the district court's holding that he was not entitled to any back pay or front pay after he was fired from his next job. He also argues that the district court erred in rejecting the contention that he was unable to get a subsequent job because he was psychologically disabled. That Spencer Press is responsible for this disability because it stems from the harassment he endured while he was an employee there. We affirm the limitation on Johnson's front pay and back pay.
	OPINION/ORDER While Robinson was operating the press in December 2001. The press was a Kluge 6 Roller Automatic Platen Printing Press. A mechanical process in which paper is fed by a mechanical arm onto one large surface. An operator was required to use the press manually during what is described as the
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the brief was Charles F.C. With him on the brief was Max Stier. With her on the brief was Charles J. Some individ uals have paused to give their versions of what transpired during their grand jury appearances. Others have refused to be interviewed or to give a public statement. Fay sit on the Division for the Purpose of Appointing Independent Counsels. 2 Appellants are Dow Jones & Company. To a hallway outside the room where the grand jury is sitting. No judge presides and none is present. Inside the grand jury room are sixteen to twenty three grand jurors. The witness is sworn. All to the end of determining whether
	OPINION/ORDER Jurors' names that were disclosed in open court. A former executive of Credit Suisse First Boston (
	OPINION/ORDER Were on brief. Plaintiffs appellants Ismael Hochen (
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs were Daniel J. With him on the brief were Peter D. Trudeau alleges that the press release is itself false and misleading. I Plaintiff Trudeau is a best selling author and producer of radio and television information commercials (
	OPINION/ORDER Senior Judge Butzner wrote a dissenting opinion. *Judge Murnaghan heard oral argument in this case but died prior to the time the decision was filed. 2 BELL v. Bell was convicted by a jury in North Carolina of fifty eight counts of sexual misconduct comprised of eight counts of first degree rape. Because Bell's petition for writ of habeas corpus was filed after the April 24. 1602 (2000). 2 The record indicates that twenty seven additional counts were dismissed during the course of the trial. 1 BELL v. When Wendy was awakened on a Saturday morning by Bell. Wendy was twelve years old and in the sixth grade. Bell was fiftyfive years old. The threat was effective. While his wife was sleeping or at work. Both of whom lived nearby and were friends of Wendy. Toni also testified that she was present at Bell's home on one occasion when he sexually molested Wendy. Toni was eleven years old when the abuse began. Bell's wife was cooking dinner and Vicki. Vicki was twelve years old. JARVIS hoping Bell would leave Wendy alone if Vicki was present.
	OPINION/ORDER Determining that (a) Deutsche Bank was on notice in August 1999 of adverse claims to defendants' securities. (b) all interests in defendants' securities that Deutsche Bank obtained after it was on notice of adverse claims are invalid. (c) all margin loans extended by Deutsche Bank after it was on notice of adverse claims are unsecured. Circuit Judge: A lender holding securities as collateral for a loan is protected from adverse claims to those securities if the lender
	UNITED STATES V. MCVEIGH Which motion was made available to the public only in redacted form. Which were made available to the public only in redacted form. At the time this action was commenced. Who is accused of assisting McVeigh in his preparation for the bombing. Is scheduled to go to trial following the conclusion of post trial proceedings in the McVeigh matter. Nichols heard a news report that McVeigh was a suspect in the bombing. Asked to speak with someone regarding why his name was being mentioned in connection with the bombing investigation. Nichols was arrested on a material witness warrant from the United States District Court in Oklahoma City. (3) whether there was a substantial probability that some recognized interest of higher value than public access to information will be prejudiced or affected adversely by the disclosure. (5) whether closure by the court was essential to protect that interest. The relevant documents are: (1) The redacted portions of Nichols'
	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
	PRESS BCAST CO V. FCC
	OPINION/ORDER We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. (the
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The motion is granted. The motion is denied in all other respects. This court denies Appellants' request for costs related to the preparation of its Motion to Strike and its Motion to Have Joint Appendix Corrected. 1 BERLYN INC. v. THE GAZETTE NEWSPAPERS 3 II A The plaintiffs are Berlyn. Berlyn is owned by Lynn and Bernie Kapiloff. Rossingol is a self described
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER 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 (
	A. BACKUP DOCUMENTATION, MOTIONS, ORDERS, AND HEARING TRANSCRIPTS97-2064 -- U.S. V. GONZALES -- 07/28/1998 If there is a right of access.
	OPINION/ORDER If in the opinion of the magistrate the evidence shows that there is probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the defendant has committed it. We will first discuss the Supreme Court's ruling in Press Enterprise II. PRESS ENTERPRISE II Section 868 of the California Penal Code required preliminary hearings to be open to the public unless
	ESTATE OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., INC. V. CBS, INC. (11/5/1999, NO. 98-9079) Martin Luther King's famous
	ESTATE OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., INC. V. CBS, INC. (11/5/1999, NO. 98-9079) Martin Luther King's famous
	OPINION/ORDER Both defendants were convicted. No reason for holding the proceedings in the robing room is apparent in the record of either case. Because the public and press have a qualified First Amendment right of access to plea and sentencing proceedings. Goiry's case is remanded for resentencing. Munoz's plea is vacated and the case remanded for further proceedings. Oral arguments were heard in the appeals of the Munoz and Goiry cases by two panels of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 this court on March 9. Respectively. 1 We have consolidated these cases for purposes of disposition on appeal because they raise a similar issue. Munoz entered her plea in the robing room and Goiry was sentenced in the robing room. The public and press have a qualified First Amendment right of access to plea and sentencing proceedings.
	OPINION/ORDER The effect on the record of the District Court's addition to it after a notice of appeal is filed. Because we hold that we have jurisdiction over an appealable collateral oral order. That it was error to issue the gag order. It will be reversed. The order was to last until the Court received the motion and decided it. The article stated that the device
	OPINION/ORDER We hold that Procedure 770 is an exaggerated. Unreasonable response to prison officials' legitimate concerns about the safety of prison staff and thereby unconstitutionally restricts the public's First Amendment right to view executions from the moment the condemned is escorted into the execution chamber. It is helpful to understand the execution process. Approximately 25 minutes before the execution is scheduled to take place. Though his legs are free. The condemned is handcuffed and his wrists are shackled to his waist. The condemned is laid on a gurney. To which he is secured with six straps. Two of the four guards leave and two medical technicians enter to insert two intravenous lines (one is redundant. Once the intravenous lines are inserted. Representatives of the public and the press have been allowed to witness California's entire execution process from start to finish. Strap him into the chair and administer the lethal gas until he was declared dead. Witnesses were not permitted to watch Bonin as the guards brought him into the chamber.
	OPINION/ORDER Published opinion filed 12/2/99 is vacated Filed: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98 7002 (CA 97 232 5 H) January 4. Line 3 of second indented quotation the phrase
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER It is indeed questionable whether. The plaintiff could have obtained effective judicial review of the validity of the government's proposed subpoena of the plaintiff's phone records without it. Could obtain records that identify journalists' confidential sources in gross and virtually at will. It is difficult to see in whose best interests such a regime would operate. For the question at the heart of this appeal is not so much whether there is protection for the identity of reporters' sources. Or even what that protection is. How any such protection is overcome. United States Department of Justice regulations have set forth a departmental policy designed to protect the legitimate needs of the news media in the context of criminal investigations and prosecutions. The Department of Justice guidelines are broadly worded. This policy statement is thus intended to provide protection for the news media from forms of compulsory process. [before a subpoena is served on a member of the media. That the information sought is essential to a successful investigation particularly with reference to directly establishing guilt or innocence.
	OPINION/ORDER McCormack was on brief for appellant. With whom O'Connell and O'Connell was on brief for appellee. Once the press was equipped with the required quick change frames (not manufactured by Trueblood) and each frame was fitted with a die containing an injectable mold. After the ejection was complet ed. The console which housed the controls for the Trueblood press was located within arm's length of the press operator and had three settings. The press operator was required to use both hands to push two widely spaced buttons on the console. Which meant that the operator's hands could not be inserted into the injection or ejection areas while the press was in operation. The
	OPINION/ORDER It is indeed questionable whether. The plaintiff could have obtained effective judicial review of the validity of the government's proposed subpoena of the plaintiff's phone records without it. Could obtain records that identify journalists' confidential sources in gross and virtually at will. It is difficult to see in whose best interests such a regime would operate. For the question at the heart of this appeal is not so much whether there is protection for the identity of reporters' sources. Or even what that protection is. How any such protection is overcome. United States Department of Justice regulations have set forth a departmental policy designed to protect the legitimate needs of the news media in the context of criminal investigations and prosecutions. The Department of Justice guidelines are broadly worded. This policy statement is thus intended to provide protection for the news media from forms of compulsory process. [before a subpoena is served on a member of the media. That the information sought is essential to a successful investigation particularly with reference to directly establishing guilt or innocence.
	OPINION/ORDER Dana & Gould were on brief for appellant. Gould were on brief for appellant. Young and Peabody & Arnold were Peter G. Young and Peabody & Arnold were on brief for appellee. on brief for appellee. *Of the District of Puerto Rico. On the ground that insurance coverage was excluded under the pollution exclusion clause. ALP purchased the Burlington site from High Voltage and leased back the portion on which High Voltage was to continue its manufactur ing operation. Hazardous materials were discovered in the soil. The contaminants were most conspicuous near a degreaser unit operated by High Voltage. The cleaning solvents utilized in the High Voltage degreaser unit were identical to the contaminants found in the surrounding area. High Voltage itself was insured under the policy for defending or indemnifying its officers and directors against third party claims. Seeking a judicial declaration that Federal was liable under the policy for losses incurred by High Voltage and its officers and directors in connection with the ALP action.
	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.
	OPINION/ORDER I. We set forth the facts as the jury could have found them in support of its verdict. SEPTA would have to pay substantial penalties. If the actual cost was 90% or less of that estimate. Pierce was responsible for monitoring those costs. John Doe is a SEPTA employee. Doe was HIV positive. Retrovir is a prescription drug used solely to treat HIV. If he or anyone else reviewed employee names in association with the drugs the employees were taking. He was never informed that this change might alter his confidentiality status. These reports were part of the contract between Rite Aid and SEPTA. This report listed employees who were filling prescriptions at a cost of $100 or more per employee in the past month. It was immediately apparent to Pierce that the reports would reveal employees' medications. Pierce stated that her purpose in reviewing the reports with Aufschauer was several fold. Some employees would purchase prescription drugs under the SEPTA health plan in order to give them to an ill friend or relative who was not covered by SEPTA's benefit package.
	OPINION/ORDER These appeals were consolidated for oral argument. Which was expedited at the Reporters' request. We entered an order which stated
	OPINION/ORDER Alleging the press brake was defectively designed. Without expert testimony to prove the press brake was defective. Shaffer appeals asserting the district court should not have excluded Dr. Expert testimony is generally admissible when it is reliable and relevant. District courts have considerable latitude in deciding whether expert testimony meets this standard. The polestar is the scientific validity of the principles underlying the expert's opinions. Armirouche would have testified the press brake's treadle bar is dangerous and unreliable. The press brake should have built in safety guards of a mechanical/sensory nature to prevent accidents from occurring. Amirouche's testimony was unreliable. Because the testimony was not based on sufficient facts and data. Amirouche had not designed or tested the devices he claimed would have prevented the accident. There was no peer review of his theories. There was no evidence of the general acceptance of his abstract theory that certain devices could have prevented the accident.
	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.
	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.
	OPINION/ORDER Centering on whether a plaintiff must have traded at about the same time as the insider it alleges violated securities laws. The facts alleged in the complaint are as follows: THC was a Nevada corporation that delivered long term acute care services through hospitals and satellite facilities across the United States. This $7.4 million buy back was in addition to another $21.1 million that THC had spent purchasing its stock in the three month period that ended on February 28. The March press release was misleading. Stating that the company had
	HEWLETT PACKARD COMPANY V. PAVKARD PRESS Inc. s (Packard Press s) application for registration of the mark PACKARD TECHNOLOGIES for data processing and data transmission services.
	OPINION/ORDER Sitting by designation. * The dismissed complaint was styled
	OPINION/ORDER Were on brief for the United States. Caruso & Rodophele were on joint brief for appellees. This is an interlocutory appeal by the government under 18 U.S.C. 3731 contesting an evidentiary ruling made prior to trial in a criminal case. The defendants were two corporations Fiber Materials. Over two thirds of Fiber Materials' work is for 2 2 the U.S. military. One of the technologies in which Fiber Materials is expert relates to the hot isostatic press. The press is a complex piece of industrial equipment that contains an internal cavity and uses high pressure gas or liquid to subject materials to intense pressure and a furnace to produce extreme heat. Various goods and technologies are subject to different levels of export control for reasons of 3 3 foreign policy. Accessories and controls
	OPINION/ORDER Alleging that it was fraudulently induced to enter into the written sales agreement. Mid West also alleges that there The District Court2 We affirm. were breaches of express and implied warranties. granted summary judgment for AM and Mid West appeals. That AM had full service that is second to none. Mid West was skeptical of purchasing the press based on these representations. This press was a sophisticated machine with electronic Even though Mid West Mid West controls and subject to variables such as set up. Operator adjustments. was satisfied with the press after this demonstration. It was still concerned it might
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: This appeal gives added credence to the ancient adage that the bearer of bad news has a losing office.1 Such is literally true in this case if plaintiff's allegations are accepted. Cioffi (plaintiff or appellant) claims his job as athletic director/director of physical education was abolished by his employer defendant Averill Park Central School District in retaliation for statements he made about a hazing incident involving high school football players. Holding that Cioffi's statements were not constitutionally protected speech and. Even if they were. The district court also held that defendants McGreevy and Johnson could not be sued in their individual capacities because they were entitled to legislative immunity. BACKGROUND From 1981 to 1999 Cioffi was a part time social studies teacher and part time athletic director for the Averill Park Central School District. Cioffi believed Earl was improperly supervising the players and that he was encouraging the high school athletes to use creatine.
	OPINION/ORDER Following Movants' appeal of this denial of injunctive relief is pending a trial before the court and an advisory jury. The Democratic and Republican candidates for United States Representative for Iowa's First Congressional District will appear on Iowa Press. Marcus is the Natural Law Party of Iowa (NLP) candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's Third Congressional District. Rusk is the Working Class Party candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's Third Congressional District. Cuddehe is the NLP candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's First Congressional District. Dimick is the NLP candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's Fifth Congressional District. Lamoureux is the NLP candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's Second Congressional District. Gratzon is the NLP candidate for the United States Senate in Iowa. Susan Marcus is a registered voter in Iowa who wishes to see these aforementioned political candidates debate with Democratic. The Democratic and Republican candidates for United States Representative for Iowa's Fourth Congressional District will appear on Iowa Press. broadcasting at 1. these Movants have brought this motion for emergency appearances
	OPINION/ORDER We conclude that the district court properly ordered arbitration and properly applied the doctrine of issue preclusion and will affirm. The Press was struggling for survival in the Pittsburgh daily newspaper market. Critical to labor negotiations at that time was the Press's desire to reduce the union membership workforce. Shall be paid to the Trust within thirty (30) days after an employee is separated. A defined contribution plan is to be established for the benefit of certain of the Company's employees who are represented by the Union. The following defined contribution plan is hereby established by the Company and the Union. The gravamen of the dispute in this case are the particulars governing the contributions to the Plan and Trust. As often is the case.
	OPINION/ORDER I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint our only source of the facts the defendant Ivax Corporation is a manufacturer of generic drugs. Ivax was profitable in 1995. The full text of the release is found in Appendix I to this opinion. The full text of such a release would not be part of the record under review for a dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) unless it was attached to the complaint. A document central to the complaint that the defense appends to its motion to dismiss is also properly considered. Provided that its contents are not in dispute. $104 million of which was a reduction in the carrying value of the goodwill ascribed to certain of Ivax's businesses. There are two theories of liability: first. That Ivax's economic projections were fraudulent. The plaintiffs argue that the district court should have granted them leave to amend the complaint. moreover. Which are [sic ] not subject to material dispute. The usual rules for considering 12(b)(6) motions are thus bent to permit consideration of an allegedly fraudulent statement in its context. 3 Appendix II contains the full text of this release. 15 U.S.C. § 78u 5(c). 15 U.S.C. § 78u 4(b). 4 5 Both the defendants' motion to dismiss.
	OPINION/ORDER Curley was on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief. (2) the purported contract with Brown for purchase of the presses was invalid. (3) its deposit to secure the presses was refundable. (4) the award of lost profits resulted from flawed jury instructions and was not supported by the evidence. Was owned by Freidel's Manufacturing. Was owned by Graphic Engineering and located in Malaysia. The two presses were to be refurbished in Rhode Island by E.R. Smith Associates to Interstate's specifications.
	OPINION/ORDER I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint our only source of the facts the defendant Ivax Corporation is a manufacturer of generic drugs. Ivax was profitable in 1995. The full text of the release is found in Appendix I to this opinion. P. 12(b)(6) unless it was attached to the complaint. A document central to the complaint that the defense appends to its motion to dismiss is also properly considered. Provided that its contents are not in dispute. Which are [sic] not subject to material dispute. The usual rules for considering 12(b)(6) motions are thus bent to permit consideration of an allegedly fraudulent statement in its context. 3 2 Appendix II contains the full text of this release. 2 million of which was a reduction in the carrying value of the goodwill ascribed to certain of Ivax's businesses. There are two theories of liability: first. That Ivax's economic projections were fraudulent. The plaintiffs argue that the district court should have granted them leave to amend the complaint. Corporations and individual defendants may avoid liability for forward looking statements that prove false if the statement is
	HARRIS V. IVAX CORP. (7/27/1999, NO. 98-4818) Background According to the complaint our only source of the facts the defendant Ivax Corporation is a manufacturer of generic drugs. Ivax was profitable in 1995. $104 million of which was a reduction in the carrying value of the goodwill ascribed to certain of Ivax's businesses. There are two theories of liability: first. That Ivax's economic projections were fraudulent. The plaintiffs argue that the district court should have granted them leave to amend the complaint. Corporations and individual defendants may avoid liability for forward looking statements that prove false if the statement is
	HARRIS V. IVAX CORP. (7/27/1999, NO. 98-4818) Background According to the complaint our only source of the facts the defendant Ivax Corporation is a manufacturer of generic drugs. Ivax was profitable in 1995. $104 million of which was a reduction in the carrying value of the goodwill ascribed to certain of Ivax's businesses. There are two theories of liability: first. That Ivax's economic projections were fraudulent. The plaintiffs argue that the district court should have granted them leave to amend the complaint. Corporations and individual defendants may avoid liability for forward looking statements that prove false if the statement is
	OPINION/ORDER Should form the continuation of the paragraph that currently is at page 6. Were on brief for appellant Penobscot Indian Nation and third party defendants appellees. Were on brief for appellee and cross appellant Key Bank of Maine. Were on brief for appellee Michael Marcello. Taintor & Abbott was on brief for defendants appellees and cross appellants. P.A. was on brief for defendant appellee and cross appellant. Hewey with whom Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon was on brief for appellees Consumers Water Company. It is not apparent from the record that the results of the investigation were set out in writing or were made known to the public. It is clear. The complaint alleged that the two Settlement Agreements signed by PIN and the Appellees were void because they did not receive the Secretary of the Interior's approval pursuant to 25 U.S.C. Together with the affidavits . . . 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.
	OPINION/ORDER P.A. were on brief for appellants. Were on brief for appellees. Falsely stated and implied to the local and national news media that Daniel Aversa was involved in laundering illegally gotten money. Found the statements to have been
	OPINION/ORDER Emmert is an engineering and transportation company that specializes in transporting objects weighing in excess of 100. Artisan is a Michigan EMMERT INDUSTRIAL v. The
	OPINION/ORDER Plaintiffs appellants in this securities fraud case are investors in the stock of Intrenet. Defendantsappellees are two Intrenet officers (the
	97-2276 -- RICE V. U.S -- 01/28/1999 Remaining were (1) a claim against the United States arising under the Internal Revenue Code. These the court found were the only sources for the information contained in the press releases. Rice contends that because the information contained in the press releases was. Whether the taxpayer's return was. Is being. Or will be examined or subject to other investigation or processing. 6103's general prohibition allows disclosure of
	OPINION/ORDER P.A. were on brief. Were on brief. P.C. were on brief. Were on brief. Who were leaders of the Winter Hill Gang. Access to the names of informants who were themselves providing information to the FBI about the criminal activities of Bulger and Flemmi.
	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
	01-1228 -- QUIGLEY V. ROSENTHAL -- 04/22/2003 BACKGROUND Plaintiffs William and Dorothy
	CHICAGO TRIBUNE CO. V. BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC. (8/28/2001, NO. 00-15133) Circuit Judges.
	OPINION/ORDER KAHN CLERK This is an appeal of the district court's order unsealing documents previously filed pursuant to a protective order entered by stipulation of the parties. Inc.'s negligent design and manufacture of the tires on Daniel's Ford Explorer were the proximate cause of his death.1 At the beginning of the litigation. Postpones the necessary showing of
	CHICAGO TRIBUNE CO. V. BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC. (8/28/2001, NO. 00-15133) Circuit Judges.
	OPINION/ORDER Hammer argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants because there were genuine issues of material fact in dispute as to (1) whether Defendants violated his procedural due process rights. (2) whether he was wrongfully discharged. (3) whether statements critical of his job performance contained in a press release were non actionable opinions protected by the First Amendment. Jurisdiction in the district court was proper based on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 1367. Jurisdiction in this court is proper based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The notice of appeal was timely filed pursuant to Fed. FACTS Hammer was the City Administrator for the City of Osage Beach. Hammer was also the City budget officer and under state statute and City ordinance was responsible for preparing the proposed budget for the mayor and the board of aldermen (the
	OPINION/ORDER At issue is whether the First Amendment precludes imposition of civil damages for the disclosure of portions of a tape recording of an intercepted telephone conversation containing information of public significance when the defendants. Wyoming Valley West School District was in contract negotiations with the Wyoming Valley West School District Teachers' Union (the
	OPINION/ORDER He was hired as the Razorbacks' head The Honorable William R. The district court dismissed the Foundation and it is not a party on appeal. 22 1 men's basketball coach in 1985. The record is replete. Richardson was asked what he and Kentucky coach Tubby Smith discussed on the floor prior to tip off. Is that. We ain't going to have to worry about all that.
	OPINION/ORDER Cohen were on the petition and reply. Were on the response. We conclude that we have power to determine the issues presented by the petition. The district court read our decision in Barry as holding that once a prima facieviolation of Rule 6(e)(2) is established. The court is required to conduct an adversarial hearing at which the prosecutor must show cause why he should not be held in contempt. The IC was ordered to produce. Reasoning that the factors for granting a stay pending appeal were not met. The court found that the IC's likelihood of prevailing on the merits of its appeal was low given the court's conclusion that the orders are not even appealable. That the harm to movants of granting a stay was substantial because without an immediate show cause hearing. Because discovery was set to begin on July 11. We ordered an administrative stay of the district court's procedural orders so that we would have sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of the petition for writ of mandamus. We now conclude that we have power to determine the issues presented in the petition.
	OPINION/ORDER Cohen were on the petition and reply. Were on the response. We conclude that we have power to determine the issues presented by the petition.
	OPINION/ORDER P.C. was on brief. LLP were on brief. The Bragas claim that these injuries were caused by a defective press that had been modified on several occasions either by Genlyte or its predecessors. The Bragas also argue that dismissal without leave to file a further amended complaint was in error. A worker would have to push two electrical buttons attached to the body of the press. As long as both buttons were pushed within four seconds of one another. Braga was working with the press when a piece of metal inserted into the die space caused it to jam. While his left hand was under the press ram. The press was activated. Braga was employed by an entity called Genlyte Thomas Group. LLC.
	OPINION/ORDER Were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellees. Other Summa Four officers and directors.1 Gross claims that Summa Four committed
	OPINION/ORDER The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings. Karedes was the manager of a public golf course undergoing renovations in the Village of The Honorable John Gleeson. Some of the renovations were to be paid for by the Village and some by a local charity that hosts a professional golf tournament at the course. It is alleged that Karedes re directed invoices sent by contractors who were confused about which entity to bill for what and sent to the Village for payment some invoices that were mistakenly issued to the charity. The district court granted the motions to dismiss filed by Press & Sun Bulletin under Rule 12(b)(6) and by News Channel 34 under Rule 12(c) on the ground that the reports at issue were substantially true and therefore not defamatory. Karedes appeals We conclude that a reasonable jury could find the reports to have defamatory 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 meaning. BACKGROUND Because Karedes' claims were dismissed on motions addressed to the pleadings.
	OPINION/ORDER Inc. were on brief. Gray were on brief.
	OPINION/ORDER Line 2 the phrase
	BOEHNER, JOHN A. V. MCDERMOTT, JAMES A. With him on the briefs was R. With him on the briefs were Frank W. Assistant Attorney Gener al at the time the briefs were filed. With him on the brief were Christopher Landau and Daryl Joseffer. Theodore J. With him on the brief were Seth M.M. If the person knew it was illegally intercepted. Is it part of
	00-4070 -- AMERICAN GRAPHICS, INC. V. TRAVELERS INDEMITY CO. -- 06/14/2001 Defendant argues that plaintiff did not preserve for appeal the issue of policy construction. Standard of Review The matter was tried to the court and we therefore review its findings of fact for clear error and its conclusions of law de novo. See Valley Improvement Ass'n v. We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the district court ruling and must uphold any finding that is permissible in light of the evidence. See Manning v. Because this is a diversity action. Plaintiff the position that the earlier incident could have caused the damage to the gears. Found that a bolt was missing and that the receiving end of the bolt had been stripped.
	OPINION/ORDER We will affirm in part and reverse in part. Adams Golf's public offering materials indicated that the Company sold its golf equipment exclusively to authorized retailers and that the golf industry was flourishing. That unauthorized retailers were selling Adams Golf's golf clubs. That retailers industry wide were carrying an oversupply of golf equipment. The Company was a golfing components supplier and a contract manufacturer. 000 shares of the Company's common stock was made at $16 per share. The District Court held that the plaintiffs who purchased Adams Golf shares on the public market did not have a private right of action under section 12(a)(2) of the 1 In their complaint. The plaintiffs argue that the defendants failed to disclose that its revenues were artificially inflated by a
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs was R. With him on the briefs were Frank W. Assistant Attorney Gener al at the time the briefs were filed. With him on the brief were Christopher Landau and Daryl Joseffer. With him on the brief were Seth M.M. If the person knew it was illegally intercepted. Is it part of
	KIMBERLIN BRETT C. V. DOJ
	OPINION/ORDER Pelullo was indicted on December 9. He was convicted by a jury on November 8. After the judgment in this case was affirmed by this 3 Court on direct appeal. We will reverse the District Court's grant of a new trial. We also conclude that Pelullo's challenge to the jury instructions is procedurally barred by United States v. We will thus affirm the District Court's denial of his request for collateral relief. We will direct the District Court to reinstate the judgment of Pelullo's conviction and his sentence. We will remand to the District Court for resolution of the remaining issues raised by Pelullo in his § 2255 motion. Even if it was listed in the Notice of Appeal. It is deemed waived. It is the government that is appealing the District Court's grant of a new trial based on the government's purported failure to abide by its Brady obligations. We are thus called upon to revisit the parameters of prosecutorial obligations under Brady. For reasons which will later become apparent. We are See. 14 F.3d 881 (3d Cir. 1994) (reversing all of Pelullo's convictions on the ground that it was error to use prior conviction upheld in Pelullo I as collateral estoppel to establish predicate offense in trial before second jury).
	01-1183 -- GALLO-LOEKS V. REYNOLDS -- 04/12/2002 The district court granted summary judgment to the county defendants because the press release was substantially true. Dismissed the federal claim against Reynolds because he was not a state actor. T.L. was then 13 years old. Reynolds was 18 years old. T.L. told her mother that she was going to a friend's house. While they were stranded. Appellant discovered that T.L. was not at her friend's house and called police. After the roads were cleared of snow and T.L. returned home. She talked with her parents and then was interviewed by Officer Philip Saraff of the Parker Police Department. Officer Saraff told her that sex was consensual if she agreed to it. T.L. then indicated that her sexual intercourse with Reynolds was consensual. T.L. indicated during this interview that she had agreed to have sex with Reynolds. Deputy Washburn included in his report a statement that T.L.
	OPINION/ORDER
	01-4049 -- CAPRIN V. SIMON TRANSPORTATION SERVICE -- 02/23/2004 1291 and AFFIRM.
	OPINION/ORDER Were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellee. We nevertheless find that the court's decision to close the proceedings was within its discretion and proper under the Act. On the same day that the juveniles were charged. Even if closure were discretionary. That the factors set forth and relied upon by the district court in its opinion are not sufficiently compelling to justify closure of the proceedings. Because these are purely questions of law. Our review is plenary. 1019 (1st Cir. 1991) (district court's interpretation of statute is reviewed de novo). The Act was intended
	OPINION/ORDER The pier was located near a cottage the couple rented as a residence. Fisher was convicted of second degree murder of Mrs. The original tape recording of Fisher's 911 call was played in open court during the trial and entered into evidence as
	OPINION/ORDER Is amended as follows: Footnote 21 on page 48. The Secretary's supporting arguments are enlightening: . . .
	OPINION/ORDER
	HORSLEY V. FELDT (9/5/2002, NO. 01-11201) Circuit Judge:
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: In the Spring of 2003 Mike Price was head coach of the University of Alabama's Crimson Tide football team. The head coach at a major university is a powerful figure. Who are in highest places. Have the most power . . . have the least liberty. Because they are most observed.
	OPINION/ORDER LLC were on brief for appellant A.E. Whitney and Roach & Wise were on brief for appellee Quint. Either functioned haphazardly or in some instances were inoperable. The work area was unheated and open to the outdoors both in winter and summer. CTS is a condition in which the median nerves and nerve tendons which pass through the carpal tunnel ÄÄ a narrow. CTS is caused by repetitive. Sigsbee confirmed that Quint did indeed have work related CTS. Fearing that Quint would spoil Staley's spotless workplace safety record were she to file a workers' compensation claim. Sigsbee characterized as
	HORSLEY V. FELDT (9/5/2002, NO. 01-11201) Circuit Judge:
	OPINION/ORDER Because the statute is a content based restriction which chills speech that
	OPINION/ORDER In which Ochoa is a criminal defendant. Sitting by designation. 2 is an intervenor. I. BACKGROUND In the 1980s Ochoa was a high ranking member of the Medellín drug cartel based out of Medellín. Was released in 1997. He was extradited to this country in 2001. Ochoa was cash poor and land rich. Ochoa sought to admit evidence at trial about an illegal scheme called the
	OPINION/ORDER Some of the video footage was used by ABC in a PrimeTime Live broadcast that was sharply critical of Food Lion. 402 was entered on the various claims. I. In early 1992 producers of ABC's PrimeTime Live program received a report alleging that Food Lion stores were engaging in unsanitary meat handling practices. The allegations were that Food Lion employees ground out of date beef together with new beef. ABC reporters Lynne Dale (Lynne Litt at the time) and Susan Barnett concluded that they would have a better 5 chance of investigating the allegations if they could become Food Lion employees. Some of the videotape was eventually used in a November 5. The truth of the PrimeTime Live broadcast was not an issue in the litigation we now describe. Food Lion sought to recover (1) administrative costs and wages paid in connection with the employment of Dale and Barnett and (2) broadcast (publication) damages for matters such as loss of good will. Punitive damages were also requested by Food Lion. Diminished stock value or anything of that nature
	OPINION/ORDER Appellants are representatives of a certified class consisting of all persons who purchased common stock. Even if Ernst did not have actual knowledge of the overstatement. We will affirm the judgment of the district court without addressing loss causation or whether Ernst can be held liable under section 10(b) for IKON's October 15. Which is headquartered in Malvern. Its shares are traded publicly on the New York Stock Exchange. The
	OPINION/ORDER Were on the briefs. Were on the brief. 19790 UNITED STATES v. The government was also required to give up all notes made by reviewing agents. 1 UNITED STATES v. The subpoenas were returnable on February 5. Consists of two professional baseball leagues the National League of Professional Baseball Clubs and the American League of Professional Baseball Clubs. 4 The names of the players are under seal and are not disclosed in this opinion. 5 CDT is a third party administrator of
	OPINION/ORDER J.) of defendants appellees' Rule 50(b) motion for judgment as a matter of law months after the conclusion of a jury trial where the verdict was in the plaintiff appellant's favor. Although it had initially believed there was a jury issue on reliance. It was convinced defendants had indisputably proven that Black had not materially relied on the artificially inflated market price of the stock. The district court rejected Black's alternative argument that because he was deceived by a material omission in a face to face transaction. He had proven reliance on the omission by his testimony that he would never have invested had he known of Finantra's manipulation of the stock price. There was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that defendants did not prove that Black did not rely on the market price. Finantra was. Accounts receivable factoring.2 Press told Black that Finantra was a great opportunity. That it was prepared to sell Black restricted shares at a significant discount to the market price.
	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
	OPINION/ORDER Karaoke is wildly popular. Countless people have lined up at various venues to perform their favorite songs with. Rights of the copyright owner is an
	OPINION/ORDER This is an appeal of three orders of the District Court arising from a pre trial discovery protective order entered on the joint request of the parties. We will dismiss in part and remand in part. Defendants contend the restriction was limited to communications that would violate the protective order. While this motion was pending. Defendant Sherry Freebery was indicted on unrelated federal charges. I think you will only compound the problem by discussing this matter until we've aired it and discovered whether or not there's substance to the allegations that are made. He emphasized the protective order was entered on the joint motion of the parties. The sealing order and press enforcement order were entered to enforce the protective order. We conclude we do not have jurisdiction to review the August 20. We conclude we have jurisdiction to review the August 20. We will remand for the District Court's further consideration. 4 II. We have jurisdiction to review all final decisions of the district courts. (2) resolves an important question that is unrelated to the merits of the underlying case.
	OPINION/ORDER We must decide whether the district court correctly concluded that the university officials were entitled to qualified immunity. We conclude there was no error and affirm. 17310 DESYLLAS v. We have jurisdiction to review the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the university officials pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Among the records were approximately 25 files on PSU students from 1978 to 1991. Who was a uniformed campus police officer. Where other students were present. He said that the records were not in the newspaper office and that the records were not in a place where he could be taken to retrieve them. He told Fowler and Diman that he realized the records were university property and that he ultimately intended to return the records. Two police officers on bicycles were visible through a window of the student government office. Where they were met by Diman and Fowler. Fowler replied that
	OPINION/ORDER Line 29 the cross reference is corrected to read
	OPINION/ORDER Because lithographic presses are generally considered more complicated and difficult to operate than flexographic presses. A supervisor realized that Boumehdi was being paid much less than her male colleagues. Even though she was performing the same job as well as they were. Bell told her that the company was being sold and that any disparity would be taken care of after the sale. 1 For purposes of this appeal. While Boumehdi was bending over in the course of her work. Vega told her to remain in that position and that it was perfect. When Boumehdi was pregnant. Vega told her that just because she is a woman does not mean that she should not take out the trash. Adding that he did not ask the men to do the cleaning because that's what women are supposed to do. Bell continued to assure her that he was looking into the matter. As she was exiting Bell's office. Boumehdi noticed that her paycheck for the week of February 24 was 2.5 hours short. She thought the shortage was a mistake. Plastag employees are rated on a one to four scale.
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs were Paul G. With him on the brief were Howard T. This is the second time that this court has had occasion to hear an appeal in this case. The District Court held that its judgment in the initial proceeding established the law of the case regarding the existence of clearly established law and that this was dispositive of the qualified immunity issue. The issue was settled as to these parties in this case. There was no good reason for the District Court to reexamine its judgment when the case was remanded for further proceedings. Is not fully dispositive of the issues raised by appellants' re newed motion for summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity. The District Court must now determine whether there are disputed issues of fact as to whether appellants violated the clearly established law either by intentionally segregating Mr. The judgment of the District Court on the law of the case issue is affirmed. The case is remanded for further proceedings to address the remaining issues on the qualified immunity claim and.
	OPINION/ORDER Which was signed by Les Baledge. The case was subsequently certified as a class action. The Shareholders now appeal that decision. 3 The Shareholders' argument is three fold. The Shareholders contend that there is at least a genuine issue of material fact as to what Baledge knew and whether he acted with the requisite scienter. They claim that Tyson Foods is primarily liable for misrepresentations in a corporate press release. We will affirm.1 Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act makes it unlawful to
	OPINION/ORDER Harnes were on brief. Glass were on brief. Sartory were on brief. Mass. 2003). GCX was a Delaware corporation that publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange (
	OPINION/ORDER Claiming that it was prejudiced by the exclusion of evidence at trial. Noting that several aspects of the back office capabilities were still under development. Moses claimed that CSS had represented that the system was already complete and functional at the June 2 meeting. After the district court found that Moses's allegations of conspiracy were too indefinite to resolve various motions to dismiss that had been raised. Which were designed to reveal the status and functionality of CSS software at Southwest and Scottsdale Securities.
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Prior to a criminal trial in which he was a participating lawyer. Morrissey was convicted of two counts of criminal contempt for violating Local Criminal Rule 57 (
	OPINION/ORDER Katherine Will. The statute allows persons who have successfully sued the government to collect attorney's fees. The relevant provision here being that the individual have a net worth of less than $2 million. Is not relevant to our determination of the fees issue. 1 4 BROADDUS v. Maintaining that Broaddus was ineligible to receive fees under EAJA because his net worth exceeded the $2 million statutory cap. A court shall award to a prevailing party other than the United States fees and other expenses . . . unless the court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). Congress's aim in adopting this statute was
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER The focus of the newspapers' attention is the putative misconduct of the government in publicly disclosing its sentencing memorandum which contained allegations of criminal conduct against several individuals who have not been charged with any crimes (
	OPINION/ORDER Nos. 01 6541/6582 ASCO is engaged in the manufacture of stamped metal products. Stamtec is engaged in the sale. (Chin Fong) is a manufacturer of large scale presses. Stamtec is a wholly owned subsidiary of Chin Fong. Which were to be specially manufactured for ASCO. Chin Fong notified ASCO that it would discontinue manufacturing the presses until and unless a down payment was made. Which was to be applied to the purchase price of the first ASCO press. Chin Fong was able to use many. The district court's disposition of a summary judgment motion is reviewed de novo. Summary judgment is appropriate where there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Material facts are those facts defined by the substantive law and that are necessary to apply it. ASCO argues that the district court's determination that Stamtec was entitled to $264. 880 in damages due to lost profits resulting from ASCO's breach was error because the district court did not make any findings as to whether Stamtec actually experienced any lost profits.
	OPINION/ORDER We will dismiss the appeal for failure to present a case or controversy sufficiently ripe for adjudication.
	OPINION/ORDER
	99-5200 -- MCCARTY V. CITY OF BARTLESVILLE -- 03/13/2001 These facts are either undisputed or. Are taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs. See Simms v. The officers were hired because the complex had only one security officer. Officer Dan Woolery were among the officers from the Department hired by Brookhaven. The McCartys were scheduled to work security at Brookhaven on a shift that began at 10:00 p.m. and ended at either 2:00 a.m. or 4:00 a.m. Was responsible for keeping track of the time officers worked security at the complex for payroll purposes. In the spring of 1997. Contacted Pat McCarty to investigate whether Officer Helkenberg was being compensated by Brookhaven as a security officer while not actually performing such work. He reviewed these records as well as Department records relating to Officer Helkenberg's scheduled work hours. Pat McCarty concluded that Officer Helkenberg was charging Brookhaven for work he did not perform. Officer Woolery was ultimately allowed the opportunity to rectify the situation by making restitution to Brookhaven and writing a letter of apology.
	OPINION/ORDER (Torch) is a service provider that installs and maintains underwater oil and natural gas pipelines and related infrastructure on the Gulf of Mexico's Continental Shelf. The IPO was conducted pursuant to a registration statement and prospectus dated June 7. The specific disclosures made in the prospectus are addressed more fully in the discussion section below. 2 1 had increased by approximately 133% from February 1999 through June 6. That information was not Though it did discuss the volatile nature of oil and natural gas prices. 15 U.S.C. §§ 77k and 77o. complaint was filed June 12. Mere conclusory allegations will not suffice to prevent a motion to dismiss. Taking issue with disclosures that were and were not made in the prospectus. They argue that the statement in the prospectus revealing that natural gas prices
	OPINION/ORDER Callahan were on brief. Greenspan were on brief. Apart from the four for which she was convicted.
	U.S. V. MICROSOFT Holley argued the causes for appellant.
	OPINION/ORDER This severance agreement stated the terms on which Linton was to leave Streetsboro. The terms of this Agreement and Release are intended to be enforced as herein written to the maximum extent permitted by law. The agreement was signed by the Board and Treasurer in their official capacities and also by the Board members and the Treasurer in their individual capacities. This press release was extremely critical of Linton. Included quotes from various Board members and the Treasurer that were especially unfavorable to Linton. This press release was eventually reported in newspapers in Virginia. The court granted Linton damages in an amount that was eventually reduced to $725. Was the probable result of Defendants' breach. Holding that its motion was
	OPINION/ORDER (Torch) is a service provider that installs and maintains underwater oil and natural gas pipelines and related infrastructure on the Gulf of Mexico's Continental Shelf. The IPO was conducted pursuant to a registration statement and prospectus dated June 7. The specific disclosures made in the prospectus are addressed more fully in the discussion section below. 2 1 The prospectus asserted. That information was not Though it did discuss the volatile nature of oil and natural gas prices. 15 U.S.C. §§ 77k and 77o. complaint was filed June 12. Mere conclusory allegations will not suffice to prevent a motion to dismiss. Taking issue with disclosures that were and were not made in the prospectus. They argue that the statement in the prospectus revealing that natural gas prices
	OPINION/ORDER Holding that the law
	OPINION/ORDER Who was a secretary at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) for a short time in 1972. During several public appearances and on a world wide web site Liddy stated that the burglars' objective during the Watergate break in was to determine whether the Democrats possessed information embarrassing to John Dean.1 More specifically. Liddy asserted that the burglars were seeking a compromising photograph of Dean's fiance that was located in Wells's desk among several photographs that were used to offer prostitution services to outof town guests. The district court determined that Wells was an involuntary public figure who could not prove actual malice by clear and convincing evidence. Because we determine that Wells is not a public figure for purposes of the ongoing public debate regarding Watergate and we also conclude that Louisiana law does not apply to two of Wells's defamation counts. We reverse the district court's grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1 John Dean was legal counsel to President Richard M.
	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
	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
	OPINION/ORDER With them on the briefs were John L. Prabhu were on the brief of amici curiae The Association for Competitive Technology and Computing Technology Industry Association in support of appellant. Burton was on the brief for amicus curiae Center for the Moral Defense of Capitalism in support of appellant. Getman was on the brief for amicus curiae Association for Objective Law in support of appellant. With them on the brief were A. Naughton were on the brief for amici curiae America Online. Was on the brief for amicus curiae Lee A. Was on the brief for amicus curiae Carl Lundgren. There are three principal aspects of this appeal. Because the substantive provisions of the order are flawed. Microsoft asserts that the trial judge committed ethical violations by engaging in impermissible ex parte contacts and making inappropriate public comments on the merits of the case while it was pending. The oral arguments before this court we find that some but not all of Microsoft's liability challenges have merit. There are several reasons supporting this conclusion.
	OPINION/ORDER K tel common stock was publicly traded on the NASDAQ National Market System (NMS). Thereby representing K tel was $226. The remaining documents filed with both courts reflect the name is spelled Kieves. This court will reference him as Kieves. 3 3 On October 19. K tel was not actually delisted as a result of the October 19. Almost 2.7 million shares of K tel common stock were sold by four individual defendants between May 8. There were only two other transactions by the individual defendants: on November 13. 000 shares which are at the end of or outside the class period) for approximately $532. The scheme was characterized by two circumstances. The Class asserts K tel knew in March 1998 of a $1.498 million loss due to the poor performance of a subsidiary and K tel was required by GAAP to write off the assets of the subsidiary in its March 10 Q filing. The Class alleged such overstating of assets in the March 10 Q and the later June 10 K is a violation of GAAP and is evidence of fraud and scienter because K tel's inclusion of the overstated assets concealed its inability to comply with the minimum necessary tangible net asset requirement for continued listing on the NMS.
	OPINION/ORDER Individually and as They Are Members of the Lexington School Committee. Smith were on brief for appellant. LLP were on brief for appellees. The advertisement promoted sexual abstinence and was proffered by a parent. Superintendent and school officials was terminated on defendants' motion for summary judgment. Holding that summary judgment should be entered for Yeo on his claims that there was state action. That each student publication was a public forum. That the decisions not to publish were impermissible view point discrimination. 1997 WL 292173 (1st Cir. The Yearbook was operated entirely by a staff of about sixty students. Staffing decisions were made by students. This staff was headed by two co editors in chief. Yankee Press Education Network. 4 was the Yearbook faculty advisor. Mechem was paid a stipend of less than $2. The Yearbook is financially independent from the school and is funded entirely through the sale of the books to students and advertising. This advertisement section was largely comprised of congratulatory or commemorative ads purchased by students and their families.
	OPINION/ORDER Introduction The question presented in this appeal is whether pretrial publicity denied John Goss a fair trial. Which is located in Meade County in the southwest part of the state on the Oklahoma border. She was shot and killed in her parents' home. The population of Meade County was approximately 5. The population of Plains was approximately 1. The murder was the first in Meade County in more than seventy years. The victim and her family were well known and respected members of the community. He was found two weeks later hiding in a small town in northwestern Oklahoma. Factual and Procedural Background The essential facts underlying Goss's crimes are not in dispute. As Janice was preparing to leave for work. As [Goss] was attempting to start the vehicle. An ambulance was called but Janice died before it arrived. A fruitless manhunt was organized. [Goss] was arrested in Tyrone. The second motion to change venue was heard only one month before trial. Goss called nine witnesses whose names were chosen at random from the local phonebook.
	OPINION/ORDER The Fair Housing Foundation of Long Beach's claims should have survived summary judgment. Alleging that the Park Apartments management company was engaged in racial discrimination and harassment. The FHF advised the City that the residents of the Park Apartments were going to file a lawsuit against the owners and managers of the complex and that a press conference was going to be held at the FHF's offices on the following day. About the alleged discrimination at the Park Apartments: This case illustrates why it is critical for apartment owners and managers to receive training in how to 12017 provide fair housing. It only took one ignorant and biased manager a few months to uproot and displace at least eight or nine such families and to send the message to yet another generation of young African Americans that they are still not welcome in middle class cities like Lakewood. The underlying action was resolved by a consent decree approved by then District Judge Wardlaw on April 2.
	99-1375 -- SMITH V. PLATI -- 07/30/2001 Hold that Smith's final allegation is moot.
	LITTLE V. BRELAND This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Little v. Visitors Corporation was a matter of public controversy thereby making Little a limited purpose public figure. The district court held that Little was a limited purpose public figure and was required to prove actual malice to prevail on his defamation claim. A limited purpose public figure is </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.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-3189A.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs contend that the $43 price was the result of materially misleading projections on November 5. Was that during 2002 the business would yield revenue growth in the </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=94-1699.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom Judith Berkan was on brief for appellants. Were on brief for appellees Ed Martin. Chief Judge. organizations representing women who have sought or will seek family planning services in Puerto Rico ( </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=03-2164.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Massachusetts (the Leeds VAMC) was convicted of murdering four patients and attempting to murder three others between August 1995 and February 1996 by injecting them with epinephrine. Some of the estates of her alleged victims have since sued the United States for wrongful death under the Federal Torts Claims Act (FTCA). Mass. 2002).</P> <P> The cases have raised the issue. Or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered. 1996 was not timely. 344 F.3d at 67.</P> <P> The instant case was brought by the estate of another patient. The theory of the case is that the nurse. The administrative claim was filed on November 10. We conclude that the administrative claim was timely because it accrued on or after November 10. 1998. <SPAN STYLE= </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.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-3189.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs contend that the $43 price was the result of materially misleading projections on November 5. Was that during 2002 the business would yield revenue growth in the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/031987.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Because the victims have failed to meet their burden. I. The facts are not in dispute. Appellants Vickie Hugger and Carolyn Settle are both employees of C.B. Hugger is the school's principal. Settle is a sixth grade teacher. HD1 was a twelve year old sixth grade student in Settle's class. Settle allowed each of her students to decorate a classroom blackboard to express his or her individuality. 3 TRI is a civil liberties organization with a two fold mission: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1D53AD205FCE6B7188256E5A00707D5B/$file/0055060.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Judges Silverman and Paez have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. The petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc is DENIED. Is hereby AMENDED as follows: 1. Footnote 4 on page 12030 of the slip opinion is deleted. 2. Are deleted and replaced with the following two new sentences: </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/3BCC4AF232AB8B5F88256E5A00707C92/$file/0055060.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Fair Housing Foundation of Long Beach's claims should have survived summary judgment. Alleging that the Park Apartments management company was engaged in racial discrimination and harassment. The FHF advised the City that the residents of the Park Apartments were going to file a lawsuit against the owners and managers of the complex and that a press conference was going to be held at the FHF's offices on the following day. About the alleged discrimination at the Park Apartments: This case illustrates why it is critical for apartment owners and managers to receive training in how to 12017 provide fair housing. It only took one ignorant and biased manager a few months to uproot and displace at least eight or nine such families and to send the message to yet another generation of young African Americans that they are still not welcome in middle class cities like Lakewood. The underlying action was resolved by a consent decree approved by then District Judge Wardlaw on April 2. </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.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-1496.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Or reputation or expose the natural defects of one who is alive. (3) the damages claim against the assistant district attorney arising from the search was barred by absolute prosecutorial immunity. We affirm both the dismissal of Mink's facial challenge to the Colorado criminal libel statute because he lacks standing and his claim is moot. We reverse the district court's dismissal of the damages claim arising from the search because we conclude it is not barred by absolute immunity. Which was created. Was to </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/200308/02-5075a.pdf">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.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9EF875B746412C0188256B0E00047B7A/$file/0055060.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Judges Silverman and Paez have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. The petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc is DENIED. Is hereby AMENDED as follows: 1. Footnote 4 on page 12030 of the slip opinion is deleted. 2. Are deleted and replaced with the following two new sentences: </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.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021965.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The plaintiff in this case was one of Fischer's victims. Plaintiff was invited to appear at Fischer's sentencing hearing in order to testify about the impact of the molestation and about the punishment Fischer should receive. The courtroom was. A reporter from the AP was in the courtroom when the judge issued the no disclosure instruction. If they have one. That the allegations in plaintiff's complaint are true. 1 DOE v. Although many other reporters were also present at the sentencing hearing. The AP reporter was apparently the only one to include plaintiff's name in his official report. The district court rejected plaintiff's invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional distress claims on state law grounds and ruled that plaintiff's fraudulent misrepresentation claim was barred by the First Amendment. Plaintiff claims that the AP is liable for the tort of fraudulent misrepresentation.2 He argues that after the trial court issued its non disclosure order. Reporting a matter that was heard in open court is not so </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//sept96/94-6668.opa.html">LITTLE V. BRELAND<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Little v. Visitors Corporation was a matter of public controversy thereby making Little a limited purpose public figure. The district court held that Little was a limited purpose public figure and was required to prove actual malice to prevail on his defamation claim. A limited purpose public figure is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/09/023756P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is a case about the taxability of business and entertainment expenses spent on a Canadian fishing trip. After the Internal Revenue Service determined that the per employee cost of Townsend Industries' annual fishing trip was wages. Sitting by designation. 1 expenses involved in the trips were employee wages within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code. Ruled that a portion of these wages should have been withheld for income tax and Social Security and Medicare taxes. Business discussions were conducted on an on going basis during the trip. The District Court's holding that Townsend failed to establish that its trips had a business purpose is a legal conclusion that we review de novo. 469 U.S. at 249 n.8 (explaining that presence of elements constituting </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTM2MjAtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-3620-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> As Trustee of the Congel Family Trust which are General Partners of Woodchuck Hill Associates. As Trustee of the Congel Family Trust which are General Partners of Woodchuck Hill Associates. As Trustee of the Congel Family Trust which are General Partners of Woodchuck Hill Associates. Whether the media intervenors can appeal a district court order that was not a final judgment. None of whom are parties to this appeal. Arguing that these were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200309/02-5075b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 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 brief were Roscoe C. Circuit Judge: At issue on this appeal are plaintiff Layne Lathram's allegations of employment discrimination by the United States Customs Service. Lathram was hired by the Customs Service as a Public Affairs Specialist at the GS13 grade level. She was still a GS13. Count II alleged that Customs discriminated against Lathram when it promoted All of the conduct charged in Lathram's amended complaint took place before many of Customs' responsibilities were transferred to the Department of Homeland Security under the Homeland Security Act of 2002. Count VI charged that that decision (along with the contemporaneous reassignment of some of Lathram's duties) was intended as illegal retaliation for Lathram's complaints about the other alleged acts of discrimination. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/June2004/023348p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> These results are alleged to have artificially inflated the company's stock price. We will affirm the final judgment of the District Court. All of which were brought by shareholders alleging they suffered damages as a result of being induced to purchase shares of Alpharma's common stock on the basis of false or misleading statements made by the company and its top executives. Plaintiffs further allege that these misstatements were the result of improper accounting procedures which inflated the company's reported revenue. Is a multinational corporation that produces pharmaceuticals for both animal and human use. Its domestic headquarters is located in Fort Lee. Defendant Einar Sissener is Alpharma's Chairman. 075 during a four day period in the first week of August 2000 when the value of Alpharma's stock was near its high point of $71 per share. Substantive Allegations The primary basis for the proposed class action is plaintiffs' allegation that the financial results released by defendants during the class period were the product of accounting irregularities which caused Alpharma to report inflated revenue figures. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-3242.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Who is Iranian. Worked for GTI since 1988.(1) GTI is in the printing business. Daneshvar's precise job title is a matter of some contention between the parties. The district court found that he was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/70F45BCFFE7AD3A488256E91007CFF8F/$file/0356129.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Certain termination payments to high level corporate officials are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/002555.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because Carr is a limited purpose public figure who has forecast no evidence that Forbes acted with actual malice in publishing the article. As Interwest was developing the Quartzsite project. Who were familiar with Carr's work in Quartzsite. The sewer district was unable to pay off its bonds and ultimately filed for bankruptcy. Was controlled by DLR. The record does not reveal whether Carr was an officer in Interwest Carolina. Was the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTY2NjUtcHJfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-6665-pr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are now See Rodriguez v. Rodriguez was tried in Kings County for selling cocaine to an undercover officer (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1965OPN.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Brody</SPAN> were on briefs for appellants.<SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></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="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1733.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Shaw & Griffith were on brief for appellant. Shaw & Griffith were on brief for appellant. Fraze & Finnerty were Armand Fernandes. Fraze & Finnerty were on brief for appellees. on brief for appellees. The parties currently are engaged in pretrial discovery. Attorney Griffith is alleged to have requested public support for 2 alleged victims of New Bedford police brutality. To have urged anyone who had suffered brutality or discrimination in the past to come forward to help establish the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-5086a.html">PILON ROGER V. DOJ<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-7001.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kyle Brinlee was a soldier in the Oklahoma National Guard who was killed in action while serving in Iraq on May 11. He was the first member of the Oklahoma National Guard to be killed in action since the Korean war. Brinlee's death and funeral were the subject of intense media coverage. Robert Showler is Sgt. (1) and Johnny Davidson is his maternal (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Sitting by designation. (1) Brinlee was adopted by Robert Brinlee. At which time Showler's parental rights were terminated. <hr> grandfather and the personal representative of his estate. Stephens that although the media was allowed to attend the funeral. Peter Turnley is an international photojournalist who was working on assignment for Harper's. Turnley is a Contributing Editor engaged on a contract basis to produce photo essays. Turnley was working on a photo essay for Harper's concerning those grieving over deaths caused by the war in Iraq. The funeral was held at the Pryor High School gymnasium. Brinlee's casket was moved to the back of the auditorium. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/07/032979P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> All of whom are officials of the Missouri Department of Corrections (the Department). The defendants argued that if the Media Policy were found to infringe upon a constitutionally protected liberty. Any such infringement was outweighed by legitimate penological interests and should be evaluated under the standards set forth in Turner v. Agreed with the defendants that the infringement was reasonable in light of legitimate penological concerns. We agree with the District Court that the case is not moot and falls squarely within the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/98opinions/98-1364.html">AUGUSTINE MEDICAL V. PROGRESSIVE DYNAMICS<BR></A><BR> With him on the brief were <U>Craig J. Of counsel on the brief was <U>J. Of counsel was <U>Robert M. With him on the brief was <U>Joseph F. Of counsel was <U>Mark A. It is undisputed that patent infringement was not part of this lawsuit. Progressive s convective warming blankets at issue in this unfair competition suit were the same as the accused blankets in the later filed patent infringement suit. The Settlement Agreement states in Paragraph 1: </P><DIR> <DIR> <P ALIGN= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1459_032.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Denver agreed to have United build the facilities that United would be using. United sought to have the bond related portions of the agreement severed from the rest of the agreement and treated as a loan rather than a lease for purposes of § 365 of the Bankruptcy Code. The agreement was a lease. It is helpful to explain briefly the importance of the lease versus loan distinction in this bankruptcy context. When a debtor's lease is at issue. If this is less than the balance due on the loan. The difference is an unsecured debt. The agreement is for a thirty one year term expiring on October 1. The primary purpose of the agreement was to facilitate United moving into and operating at the then new Denver International Airport for the aforementioned term. United's payments for its use of the ground are straightforward. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1695p.htm">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge. <br wp= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-3252.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who are in the electronic connector business. Have been involved in a number of disputes in Delaware state courts and one in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Incorporated sought a finding that the licensing agreement was breached. Methode alleged that venue was proper in the Northern District of Illinois. Sanctions were imposed against both attorney Canade and Methode. Contending that the sanctions were improperly imposed.1 As to the underlying lawsuit. It is enough to say that from 1987 to 1993 Methode owned all the stock of Adam Technologies. Methode was to sell to Vincent DeVito all of its shares in Adam Tech as well as the Adam Tech trade name and trademarks and a large amount of inventory. The claim in the present lawsuit is that less than a day after the licensing agreement was signed. Adam Tech and DeVito began to undermine Methode's rights by issuing a press release to Methode's customers which announced that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-1073.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The action was dismissed. We conclude that Lincoln's statements and actions did not run so far afoul of the governing standards under the tender offer rules that sanctions were warranted. Which is the investor group we have assembled. Is made up of The Tom James Company and other investors. Who have committed $70 million in cash equity for this transaction. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971339.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Norton Baskin (Baskin) is the personal representative of the estate of his late wife. (Seajay) physical possession of certain documents which appellants assert are assets of the Rawlings estate. Did not render a decision on the counterclaim.2 1 It is important to note the distinction between the physical ownership of documents. The physical document and the copyright are subject to separate transfer. That decision is now before this Court on appeal. She was the noted author of books such as Sojourner. In her will. Bigham was the daughter of publisher Charles Scribner. 1961.3 Rawlings' will left immediate custody of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021459.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The court also held that the alleged misrepresentations and omissions were not material as a matter of law and that certain of the alleged misrepresentations were mere puffery. Inc. was created by Congress through the Energy Policy Act of 1992 primarily to provide uranium enrichment services to transform natural uranium into enriched uranium to be used as fuel for nuclear reactors to produce electricity. Pursuant to which USEC was obligated to purchase from Russia certain components of materials derived from the highly enriched uranium contained in dismantled nuclear weapons of the former Soviet Union. Which was held during the period from July 23 through July 28. The prospectus issued in connection with the IPO stated that USEC was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/50F67AA133DE5D8088256D280073E440/$file/0056043.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Are withdrawn and replaced by the amended opinion. The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. A majority of the nonrecused active judges failed to vote in favor of en banc rehearing.* The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. Judge Rawlinson was recused. 6460 SUZUKI MOTOR CORP. v. What makes CU's ratings particularly useful is the thorough explanation of the testing procedures employed. Is no exception. The explanation is not written for morons. It is geared to an intelligent. Yet the careful reader will not fail to understand the central facts that undergird Suzuki's claim in this lawsuit. This is the death of consumer ratings: It will be impossible to issue a meaningful consumer review that a band of determined lawyers can't pick apart in front of a SUZUKI MOTOR CORP. v. The ultimate losers will be American consumers denied access to independent information about the safety and usefulness of products they buy with their hard earned dollars. The majority's analysis is tainted throughout by its failure to articulate. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTYxNjItY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/05-6162-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendant Appellee cross appeals the district court's finding that Plaintiff met its burden of production showing that the information at issue was in the public domain. Inner City Press/Community on the Move ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTYxNjItY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-6162-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendant Appellee cross appeals the district court's finding that Plaintiff met its burden of production showing that the information at issue was in the public domain. Inner City Press/Community on the Move ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199712/97-3147a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the Response to Emergency Motion for Stay Pending Appeal were Kevin T. With him on the Government's Response to Appellant's Emergency Motion for Stay Pending Appeal were Mary Lou Leary. Circuit Judge: This case requires us to refine the concept of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/99-14681.man.html">ZIEMBA V. CASCADE INT'L (7/11/2001, NO. 99-14681)<BR></A><BR> This motion was denied.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199804/96-5250a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Barba was on the briefs. Attor ney at the time the brief was filed. Were on the brief. To disclose the findings of the 1982 investigation to the Indianapolis Star with the following explanation: I'm disclosing what I have. I'm making an honest disclosure of what was found. In response to an inquiry from the press Thar acknowledged that he was disciplined as a result of the OPR investigation at a level of severity somewhere between </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sep1999/971944.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Seitz was a member of the original panel but died before the matter was decided. Asserts that its First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by a township's refusal to allow videotaping of a meeting of the Township Planning Commission. We will affirm. The application was placed on the agenda for the September 25. Said he wanted a video record of all proceedings and Riley informed the Commission that he believed allowing videotaping was required by Pennsylvania's Sunshine Act. The court held the ban was not a violation of the First Amendment because it was a reasonable time. The court also determined that plaintiff 's request for injunctive relief was moot. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. III A The primary issue on appeal is whether there is a federal constitutional right to videotape public meetings of a township planning commission when other effective means of recording the proceedings are available. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-2262.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellee. BACKGROUND BACKGROUND The FDIC insures deposits in financial institutions and is authorized by statute to act as receiver for insured institutions that fail and are closed by their chartering authority. 12 U.S.C. 1811. When the FDIC is appointed receiver for a failed institution. The FDIC is authorized to collect all obligations and moneys owed to failed institutions for the benefit of the institution's creditors and shareholders. The FDIC is empowered to avoid fraudulent transfers. Parks was a director of Olympic International Bank and Trust Company ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001185.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 4 the name </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jul2001/011512.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue on appeal is whether the District Court erred in temporarily sealing the initial filings and hearings concerning a contempt motion filed under Fed. We will affirm. It argued the motion and pr oceedings were entitled to a presumption of openness under Fed. They must remain sealed pending a deter mination whether secret grand jury information was implicated. Subpoenas relating to grand jury pr oceedings shall be kept under seal to the extent and for such time as is necessary to prevent disclosure of matters occurring before a grand jury. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/064086p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Price and Warren present two principal issues for review: (1) whether the activities they engaged in were protected by the Petition Clause. (2) whether their speech is protected after the Supreme Court's decision in Garcetti v. We will affirm the judgment of the District Court. The unit to which Price and Warren were assigned as instructors during the time period relevant to this case. Price and Warren were long term members of the DSP at 4 the time of the events giving rise to this case. Sergeant Christopher Foraker was the Section Chief of the FTU from August 1. At which point he was moved to another unit. Were specifically concerned with health and safety issues there. The bullet trap was malfunctioning. Officers and students at the range were suffering the physical manifestations of contamination. Warren explained that their objective was to limit their exposure to lead and other unsafe metals. Foraker were not permitted to speak to the press without the approval of superior officers. They were ordered to submit to a hearing examination to determine whether they were fit for duty. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/09/97-4074.htm">97-4074 -- STERLIN V. SYSTEMS -- 09/02/1998<BR></A><BR> Concluding that Plaintiff's claims were barred by the statute of limitations. BACKGROUND</strong> <p> Biomune is a biotech company which. Was developing a protein called Immuno C to be used in enhancing human immune systems. David Derrick was Biomune's President. Aaron Gold and Charles Quantz were directors of Biomune. Was a member of Biomune's Business Advisory Board. Whose beneficiaries are Solomon's family members. Genesis Trust was at one time Biomune's largest shareholder. Both Derrick and Gold were directors of Genesis. Was also a shareholder of Biomune. Who was subject to a consent decree for previous securities violations. NASDAQ notified Biomune that it was deferring consideration of its application pending a review by the NASDAQ Listing Qualifications Committee. NASDAQ was concerned with disciplinary actions taken against </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/041375.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was convicted. The underlying case from which this appeal comes to us is Washington's VIRGINIA DEP'T OF STATE POLICE v. The merits of that case are not now before us. We are presented with a challenge by the Virginia Department of State Police ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/00-12390.man.html">DOW JONES & CO. V. KAYE (7/12/2001, NO. 00-12390)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//feb2002/99-8007.opn.html">SIKES V. TELELINE, INC.(2/13/2002, NO. 99-8007)<BR></A><BR> <A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-4079.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was the alter ego of defendant Didde Web Press Corporation (Didde Web Press). That Chromas was liable for breach of contract. That Chromas was not liable for fraud. Should have decided whether to pierce the corporate veil under an alter ego theory and that the damage award was irrationally high. By 1998 they were all owned by one company. 649.60 for a printing press that was never built and that. It was misled into making payments to Didde Web Press. A manufacturer of printing presses that was well on its way to bankruptcy. International thought it was really doing business with Chromas. Didde Web Press and Chromas were not strangers. Both were then owned by the Didde Corporation. International had to show that the separate corporate status between Chromas and Didde Web Press was invalid. The jury found that (1) the corporate veil should be pierced because Chromas was the alter ego of Didde Web Press. (2) Chromas was liable for breach of contract. (3) Chromas was not liable for fraud. Because the only other remaining defendants were in bankruptcy proceedings. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19998007.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We held that the district court erred in certifying two classes under Rule 23(b)(3)2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because the plaintiffs had failed Our decertification of the class based upon predominance negates the need to address whether providing notice of this action by means of publication rather than by individual notice was proper. One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all only if (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class. (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class. (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. 2 to demonstrate that common issues predominated.3 The first class of plaintiffs. An action may be maintained as a class action if the prerequisites of subdivision (a) are satisfied. That a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/00-12390.man.html">DOW JONES & CO. V. KAYE (7/12/2001, NO. 00-12390)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200401/02-5312a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1997/97a1695p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The three appellants in the present matter were defendants in an action brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Our principal concern is with their challenge to the district court's order of disgorgement. We have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Is involved in a number of business ventures. She is the sole owner and president of Susan Lachance Industrial Design (SLID) and she is the president of Flat Rock Developers. These press releases did not mention that the acquisition candidates were all owned and controlled by affiliates of Hughes. Among the companies named as acquisition candidates were SLID and Flat Rock. That SLID was in good financial shape (in fact. It had only just emerged from bankruptcy) and was being acquired by Hughes. A more complete statement of the facts is available in Wiley v. Supp. 1264 (D.N.J. 1990). 3 Rock was an active concern (in fact. It was dormant and had no revenue at the time of the press release) and that Hughes had sufficient capital to acquire the business and to expand its real estate holdings. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-2753.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Michael McKevitt is being prosecuted in Ireland for membership in a banned organization and directing terrorism. He asked the district court for an order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to produce tape recordings that he thinks will be useful to him in the crossexamination of David Rupert. 03 2754 motion is the key witness for the prosecution. Its order is directed against a group of journalists who have a contract to write Rupert's biography and who in the course of their research for the biography interviewed him. The tape recordings that they made of the interviews and are in their possession are the recordings sought in McKevitt's motion. The recordings were turned over to McKevitt. He would have memorialized the information contained in them and the information would inevitably become public at his trial. The appeal was not yet moot. There is no irregularity in a court's explaining the ground of a decision after the decision itself has been made ending the case. Provided the materials are not privileged. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/06-1169.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the brief was W. With him on the brief were Jennifer M. I. BACKGROUND PHG and its predecessors have been in the business of selling certain medical patient identification labels as well as identification labeling software in the United States since 1995. The first nine rows are depicted to contain three labels of equal size. The difference between the two patents is that the border is part of the design claimed in the '405 patent but not part of 06 1169 2 the design claimed in the '197 patent. Which is still pending at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. John argued that the patented medical label sheets are primarily functional and presented evidence from the prosecution history of the '425 utility application and from an affidavit submitted by Adam Press. Performing a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0439p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who is unaffiliated with Audi. D'Amato alleges that when he asked if displaying the logos was permissible. Skal was not affiliated with Audi in any way.1 Id. at 650. These items were posted for sale in 2003. Audi already HAS a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/99-14681.man.html">ZIEMBA V. CASCADE INT'L (7/11/2001, NO. 99-14681)<BR></A><BR> This motion was denied.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8BEB8417FA60D048882571FF005569D8/$file/0435608.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was injured by a defective printing press while working at a prison job for which he had voluntarily applied. We further hold that a prison official is not entitled to qualified immunity when he orders a prisoner to continue operating prison work equipment that the official has been warned and has reason to believe is unnecessarily dangerous. Where the underlying facts are disputed. We </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2002/995960.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> National class action involved the claims of over eight million policy holders of Prudential Life Insurance Company who were represented by many lawyers. We will affirm in part and reverse in part. Prudential removed those class actions to federal district court and Malakoff's subsequent motions to remand were denied. Malakoff argued that the two state class actions in which he was counsel should be litigated separately from the national class asserted by Lead Counsel. Were settled on a nationwide basis in late 1996. That request for sanctions was withdrawn within the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=03-3933_030.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Fessehaye was born in the Ethiopian province of Tigray. The couple has two children who are citizens of the United States. He conceded that he was subject to deporta No. 03 3933 3 tion. His asylum application was based on past persecution and a fear of future persecution because he is a Jehovah's Witness a church that is subject to widespread persecution and distrust in Eritrea. She claimed to have a well founded fear of persecution. Two sovereign countries that have been at war and now coexist in an environment of continuing distrust. She believed that she would be persecuted if returned to Eritrea because she was a native of Tigray. The provisions governing motions to reopen were found at 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(6). Fessehaye's motion presently is located at 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7). The only differences being that (1) the more recent application is made on the October 2001 revision of Form I 589. Ghebremedhin's case is before the BIA and that the couple's children are citizens of the United States. Regulatory provisions governing motions to reopen and to reconsider were codified at 8 C.F.R. § 3.2. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//feb2003/00-14413.op2.html">ATLANTA JOURNAL AND CONSTITUTION V. CITY OF ATLANTA DEP'T OF AVIATION (2/28/2003, NO. 00-14413)<BR></A><BR> Is permitted to assess profit conscious fees on expressive activities for use of distribution facilities in a non public forum. The district court found that the assessment of any fee in excess of administrative costs was contrary to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and precedent in this circuit under <SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043298p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Before the IPO was to occur. Some details about the policy were disclosed in Merck's registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Medco IPO was canceled. Are jointly and severally liable as controlling persons under section 20(a) of the `34 Act. Union is the lead plaintiff for a class of investors owning stock in Merck. Which were not fully disclosed until. A. Medco's revenue recognition policy Medco is a pharmacy benefits manager (PBM). The pharmacist checks with Medco to ensure that the customer is an approved beneficiary. It changed this language in its 2001 Form 10 K to state that revenues were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/feb2003/00-14413.op2.html">ATLANTA JOURNAL AND CONSTITUTION V. CITY OF ATLANTA DEP'T OF AVIATION (2/28/2003, NO. 00-14413)<BR></A><BR> Is permitted to assess profit conscious fees on expressive activities for use of distribution facilities in a non public forum. The district court found that the assessment of any fee in excess of administrative costs was contrary to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and precedent in this circuit under <SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/49F73C863DE5878688256BE20074E049/$file/0056043.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> CU's motion for summary judgment was granted by the district court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. BACKGROUND CU is a nonprofit corporation that engages in comparative testing and evaluation of consumer products and services. The results of which are published in the magazine Consumer Reports. Was introduced in the United States in 1985. The petition was denied. Although the NHTSA emphasized that the denial was not an endorsement of the safety performance of a vehicle. A double lane change avoidance maneuver test course that CU had used since 1973.2 The long course was designed to replicate an emergency situation in which a driver suddenly steers a vehicle left into the opposing lane. Several CU personnel were in attendance during the April 20 testing. CU driver Kevin Sheehan reported that the Samurai was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199812/98-1061a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the brief were Christopher J. Cole was on the brief for intervenor Press Communications LLC. Arguing that Press was not qualified to be a licensee because of alleged deception in a decade old transaction involving the acquisition of a complete ly different station. They claim to have done so in two ways: as listeners and as competitors. The only assertions of fact on which petitioners base their claim to listener standing is that they are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/feb2002/99-8007.opn.html">SIKES V. TELELINE, INC.(2/13/2002, NO. 99-8007)<BR></A><BR> <A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CA73D3C3264A0F9588257235007DA165/$file/0435608.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: On slip opinion page 17457. Appellee's petition for rehearing/error correction is GRANTED. CANADY 18837 tion for rehearing en banc are DENIED. Was injured by a defective printing press while working at a prison job for which he had voluntarily applied. We further hold that a prison official is not entitled to qualified immunity when he orders a prisoner to continue operating prison work equipment that the official has been warned and has reason to believe is unnecessarily dangerous. Where the underlying facts are disputed. We </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1199.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Were on brief. <U>Chief Judge</U>.</STRONG></FONT><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/05/97-1095.htm">97-1095 -- MORRISON KNUDSEN CORP. V. FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE CO. -- 05/11/1999<BR></A><BR> GIT's evidence of several of its categories of damages was insufficient. Its claims on behalf of its lower tier subcontractors were premature. This court cannot determine whether any parts of the jury's award were for allowable categories of damages supported by sufficient evidence. The contract price was roughly $9.3 million. GIT's central theory is that its plan to complete the project before the deadline displeased MK. The contract allowed MK to do so if GIT was not prosecuting the work with a diligence that would ensure its timely completion. The subs were demanding payment from GIT. GIT was still involved in litigation with Robinson and had not settled with or paid Bogue or GA Western. Arguing that GIT had changed its damage theory just weeks before trial and was using previously undisclosed documentation. <p> Twelve days before trial. GIT's Alleged Discovery Violation <p> MK argues that GIT's supplemental damage disclosure was subject to mandatory exclusion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(1).<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19966084.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Limited is a company owned by Philip Choy and on behalf of which Choy traded his Comptronix stock. A default judgment was entered against Magatronic on November 30. Pegram was made Vice President of Purchasing and Material Management for Comptronix. Pegram was also issued 869. Pegram was removed from his position as Vice President of Purchasing and Material Management and made Vice President of Marketing. Who was at that time the Chairman and CEO of Comptronix. Seeking a declaratory judgment and damages.2 Immediately after Pegram's complaint was filed. Pegram was eventually terminated in December 1989. That Hebding had tortiously interfered with Pegram's employment contract. 2 will be lower than previously anticipated. Pegram contends that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/11/043428P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Royce Dale Young was injured while working as a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1235.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Suris & Godreau were on brief for appellant. Ram rez Lavandero & Associates were on brief for appellees. Appellant Romero Barcelo was the Governor of Puerto Rico. Subpoenas were issued for documents in the possession of the 1Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals are reviewed under the rubric that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Oct1994/94a0856p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Retailers who market wallpaper by providing sample books and showroom displays have feuded with dealers who sell at a discount through toll free </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1538.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 1996 is amended as follows: On page 42. Insert </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-3266.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Katie Lane and Sarah Rice are former editors of the Kansas State Collegian ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/68621B180CDD63F388256EA0005CDA07/$file/press-release-ORassistedsuicideb.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which was enacted by ballot measure and authorizes physicians to prescribe lethal doses of controlled substances to terminally ill Oregon residents. The panel held that the Ashcroft Directive is unlawful and unenforceable for three reasons: The Ashcroft Directive lacks clear congressional authority. Unless Congress' authorization is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/982567.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> An environmental torts action was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina against Conoco. Conoco was alleged to be responsible for harmful gasoline contamination present in two underground wells located in Wilmington. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of 178 trailer park residents whose drinking water was drawn from the contaminated wells. Finding that Conoco was liable for both compensatory and punitive damages. The case was then dismissed. 781 (4th Cir. 1998) ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1998/98a1932p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue on appeal is whether the district court erred by concluding that Mark Madden. Is entitled to claim a journalist's privilege. We hold that he is not and will reverse. I. We will summarize only those facts necessary to give context to the issue. Are the most prominent professional wrestling promoters in the United States. 2 none of which are germane to this appeal. A nonparty witness who is employed by WCW. Which are replayed to callers on WCW's 900 number hotline. That his announcements are as much entertainment as journalism. The district court concluded that Madden was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/00-12532.man.html">THEOHAROUS V. FONG (7/11/2001, NO. 00-12532)<BR></A><BR> Roadmaster was engaged in the business of manufacturing bicycles. The purpose of which was to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-3066.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the brief were Martha B. The Hatch Act1 is the colloquial designation for the federal statute that prohibits covered government employees from engaging in certain partisan political activities. Because we discern no legal error in the Board's decision and it was supported by substantial evidence. The mayoral race is intended to be nonpartisan and the names of the candidates are listed on the ballot without party or other designation. McEntee was employed as an air traffic control specialist with the Federal Aviation Administration ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/08/99-1329.htm">99-1329 -- MATHEWS V. DENVER POST -- 08/24/2001<BR></A><BR> Holding that Mathews had not shown he was a disabled person within the meaning of the Act. Nor had he shown he was qualified to do his job on the dates in question. Was promoted to journey level mailer in 1988. Is currently employed there. John Mathews did have an epileptic seizure and I would not be comfortable with him either driving. This is a fairly standard guideline generally accepted within the community. <p> As time passed. Some of which have occurred at work. There is no cure for this condition though reasonable control has been achieved with Dilantin. I cannot assure him that he might not have isolated sporadic seizures without warning. It would be best if he were not to drive or work around heavy machinery. <p> Mathews sought to return to work. Three of which were: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/007173.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Mathis is corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar98/96-6084.man.html">SEC V. ADLER (3/27/1998, NO. 96-6084)<BR></A><BR> Pegram was made Vice President of Purchasing and Material Management for Comptronix. Pegram was also issued 869. Pegram was removed from his position as Vice President of Purchasing and Material Management and made Vice President of Marketing. Who was at that time the Chairman and CEO of Comptronix. Seeking a declaratory judgment and damages.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/9_opinions/90-3211a.html">USA V. EDMOND<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar98/96-6084.man.html">SEC V. ADLER (3/27/1998, NO. 96-6084)<BR></A><BR> Pegram was made Vice President of Purchasing and Material Management for Comptronix. Pegram was also issued 869. Pegram was removed from his position as Vice President of Purchasing and Material Management and made Vice President of Marketing. Who was at that time the Chairman and CEO of Comptronix. Seeking a declaratory judgment and damages.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/91F6A4F45EB825EA88256D780079B727/$file/0157136.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court's judgment is reversed and remanded. BACKGROUND This securities fraud case is a class action on behalf of investors who purchased Dura Pharmaceutical securities between April 15. This appeal is drawn specifically to alleged misleading and untrue statements made by Dura and its officials (collectively </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=91-2256.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lubart was on brief for Robert A. Were on brief for the Internal Revenue Service et al. 1 *Of the District of Rhode Island. I Background Robert Aronson is a lawyer who specializes in finding persons to whom the government owes money and. Helping them obtain the money that is their due. 3 3 Insofar as he finds people whom the agency would not otherwise have found. Insofar as he finds and charges people whom the agency would have located on its own. His service is less beneficial. 188 (1st Cir. 1987) (Department's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/032691np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Wilhelm was awarded $250. There was an equitable relief hearing on the issue of Wilhelm's request for front pay. She alleged that she was terminated on May 1. The equitable hearing was then held to determine whether Wilhelm should be reinstated or receive front pay. The defendants disputed this claim and provided evidence that the Commonwealth was willing to reinstate Wilhelm in a comparable position. Testified that the Commonwealth was willing to place Wilhelm in the Department of Corrections as a Deputy Press Secretary for six months and that the PSP would pay her salary during that period the same salary that she had received at the PSP. DISCUSSION We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Apr1998/98a1822p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm the order of the district court. Describes itself as a non profit organization whose </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/09/041482P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor. Implicit in the grant of authority to review a final BIA order is the authority to review an order denying a motion to reopen the final order. 654 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review is abuse of discretion). Factual Summary Jalloh was born and raised in the Kono district of Sierra Leone. Is a member of the Fula2 tribe. Jalloh claims his deceased father was a diamond businessman and member of the All People's Congress. Jalloh claims his father was imprisoned for six months. Jalloh contends his first story was published in March 1995. Immediately after his story was published. Jalloh was then forced into a vehicle and taken with his hands tied and with a stick under his knees to an administrative court. Where he was detained for eight hours. I. 2 Alternate spellings include </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1206.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Epstein with whom Spillane & Epstein was on brief for Joao Carreiro. Mahoney & Miller were on brief for Main Machinery Company and H. Fine with whom Licht & Semonoff was on brief for Barry G. Fox was on brief for The Robbins Company. Whose wife Teresa was killed while operating a machine press at The Robbins Company ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/06-1402.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the brief were Terry Kearney and Michael A. With him on the brief were Richard L. Of counsel was Jeffrey M. The device relies on a grid of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199903/98-7093a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Thomas C. With him on the brief was Gaela K. Americable argues that the contract is void because it violates a statutory prohibition of contingent fee arrangements for the procurement of government ser vices. That Keefe is barred from bringing this suit by the District of Columbia's three year statute of limitations on breach of contract claims. The district court ruled that some of Keefe's claims were not time barred. We disagree that the contract is invalid as a matter of law. Paragraph 4 of the letter agreement states in relevant part: In the event that [Americable is] awarded a contract to install a CATV system on a U.S. Government installation 1 The first agreement between the parties was executed on September 24. We will refer only to the more recent agree ment. In the event the Government Installation is closed or [Am ericable] ceases to provide services to said Government Installation [Americable's] obligation to pay The Keefe Company shall cease. Keefe was to receive 2 percent of the gross sale price. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200004/99-1202a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Paul J. With her on the brief were Leonard R. The parties were unable to reach a final agreement. An Administrative Law Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/063098p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was indicted on January 20. Claiming they are unsupported and politically motivated. His trial was scheduled to begin in October 2006. We have stayed it pending disposition of three applications that are before us: (1) Wecht's challenge of Local Rule 83.1 of the U.S. Wecht was indicted on January 20. This feud was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7F3BA4A0474E22B988256DAA0056D28D/$file/press-release-swvoter-enbanc.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Rawlinson (per curiam) This matter was reheard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. California voters will be asked to vote on the recall of the California governor and two state propositions: Proposition 53. Page 1 of 2 The en banc panel concluded that the plaintiffs had not established a clear probability of success on the merits of their equal protection claim that voters in counties that use punch card machines will have a comparatively lesser chance of having their votes counted than voters in counties that use other technologies. The en banc panel concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that plaintiffs will suffer no hardship that outweighs the stake of the State of California and its citizens in having this election go forward as planned and as required by the California Constitution. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F791E417FFE2746988256DA2005DB89E/$file/press-release-swvoter.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Santa Clara and Solano counties) rather than others will deny voters equal protection of the laws in violation of the United States Constitution. California voters will be asked to vote on the recall of the California governor and two state propositions: Proposition 53. The panel concluded that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their equal protection claim that there is no rational basis for using. The panel further held that the plaintiffs' action is not likely to be barred by the res judicata effect of a prior action challenging the use of pre scored punchcard ballots. The panel agreed with the district court that the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm if preliminary injunction relief is not granted because there is no possible post election remedy. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/31F0472AE8A769E588257013007DAC1B/$file/0235971nographic.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 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' </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jul1998/98a1911p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue on appeal is whether the district court erred by concluding that Mark Madden. Is entitled to claim a journalist's privilege. We hold that he is not and will reverse. I. We will summarize only those facts necessary to give context to the issue. Are the most prominent professional wrestling promoters in the United States. None of which are germane to this appeal. A nonparty witness who is employed by WCW. Which are replayed to callers on WCW's 900 2 number hotline. That his announcements are as much entertainment as journalism. The district court concluded that Madden was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/03/96-3197.htm">96-3197 -- LYTLE V. CITY OF HAYSVILLE KANSAS -- 03/11/1998<BR></A><BR> Lytle was employed as a police officer by the City of Haysville. When he was discharged after alleging that fellow Haysville officers committed second degree murder by failing to render emergency aid to the victim of a police shooting. Because the important factual issues in this case are in reality undisputed and because the district court's decision involves questions of law under the appropriate balancing tests. We believe that this case is suited for summary judgment. The officers had received instruction in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as part of their law enforcement training and had learned that they should not move or perform CPR on critically injured persons who are still breathing. Wilson was. Where he was pronounced dead a short time later. <p> Approximately an hour after the shooting. Wilson was. Berg was demanding a grand jury investigation of the shooting and threatening to sue the City. Lytle explained that it was his wife who had first contacted Mr. Which was interview Mrs. He was going to die anyway. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/061205np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Saldeen contends that the BIA and the IJ erred in concluding that he was not subject to past persecution on account of his political opinions and that he did not have a well founded fear of future persecution. We will deny the petition. Saldeen received notice that he was to appear in removal proceedings. The first incident occurred while he was working in Columbo at a printing press owned by his cousin Mohamed Fazeer. The group then took Saldeen and Fazeer to a police station and alleged that they were responsible for printing illegal posters attacking the UNP. He and Fazeer were held in the same jail cell and beaten by the police. They were separated. He was left tied to the pillar for one day. Saldeen claims that he was beaten about three to four times each day. Saldeen and his cousin were then released from police custody. Saldeen testified that he did not see a doctor because he went to a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/061052np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm. Factual Background1 Sel Leb is a New York corporation that distributes and markets consumer merchandise to retailers. George Fischer were company directors. LLP was a company auditor. Our review is limited to the contents of the complaint and any attached exhibits. The company said it was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200708/04-5350c.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Daniel J. Duff were on the brief for amici curiae John E. Edmonds was on the brief for amici curiae Emil Freireich and Stephen Strum in support of appellants. With him on the brief were Peter D. Turner was on the brief for amici curiae American Society of Clinical Oncology. Schultz was on the brief for amici curiae National Organization for Rare Disorders. Circuit Judge: This case presents the question whether the Constitution provides terminally ill patients a right of access to experimental drugs that have passed limited safety 3 trials but have not been proven safe and effective. The district court held there is no such right. A divided panel of this Court held there is. Because we conclude that there is no fundamental right </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19966084.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Pegram was made Vice President of Purchasing and Material Management for Comptronix. Pegram was also issued 869. Limited is a company owned by Philip Choy and on behalf of which Choy traded his Comptronix stock. A default judgment was entered against Magatronic on November 30. Pegram was removed from his position as Vice President of Purchasing and Material Management and made Vice President of Marketing. Who was at that time the Chairman and CEO of Comptronix. Seeking a declaratory judgment and damages.2 Immediately after Pegram's complaint was filed. Pegram was eventually terminated in December 1989. Management expects that sales and earnings for the second half of 1989 will be lower than previously anticipated. Pegram contends that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/00-12532.man.html">THEOHAROUS V. FONG (7/11/2001, NO. 00-12532)<BR></A><BR> Roadmaster was engaged in the business of manufacturing bicycles. The purpose of which was to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FC2B9D62091E5B4F88256B9D007A1FCF/$file/0170941.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2001 is amended as follows: At slip op. p.16333. Add the following: The right </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-1713_037.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> On the basis of any of the theories the plaintiffs have presented to us. Some or all of their claims are entitled to go forward. It concluded that the federal statute of limitations applicable to the plaintiffs' claims was not tolled during the pendency of certain state class actions in the California courts. Which were necessarily based on state rather than federal antitrust law. Whether viewed as a question of the time when the plaintiffs reasonably could have discovered that Morgan had anything to do with their injuries or viewed as a question of equitable estoppel and fraudulent concealment. The facts taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs could support a finding that their suit was timely. That the plaintiffs' claims against Sumitomo and Global were correctly dismissed. We therefore limit our discussion of the facts (taken for present purposes in the light most favorable to plaintiffs) to those that are of particular relevance. In the underlying actions that were consolidated under the multidistrict litigation (MDL) statute. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=91-1868.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ramirez & Ramirez were on brief. Dominguez & Totti were on brief. The Executive Order is reproduced in an appendix to the district court's rescript. Each agency was directed </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="475"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1090.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With whom Hardy Wood Tabor & Chudacoff was on brief. The House's head doorkeeper.1 The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of House Rule 45 a rule that purports to ban both lobbyists and lobbying from the floor of the House while the House is in session on its face and as applied. Among them was Rule 45 (the full text of which is reproduced in the appendix). Rule 45 banishes all lobbyists from the floor of the House (and the House lounge) while the House is in session. The rule permits members of the public to be on the House floor while the House is in session. The legislator plaintiffs have not appealed and. Government officials who lobby are given considerably more leeway. Are otherwise exempt from the Act's provisions. Neither elected officials nor other public employees are required to wear identification badges. The House provided two galleries overlooking the chamber which were accessible to all members of the public. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="449"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov2002/01-15182.opn.html">ELLIS V. BARD, INC. (11/12/2002, NO. 01-15182)<BR></A><BR> Are liable for her mother's brain damage because of their defective labeling and specifically their failure to warn adequately of the danger of having a person other than a doctor or patient activate the morphine pump that was prescribed for her mother. FACTS</CENTER> </STRONG></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="449"></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
	OPINION/ORDER He contends that when such acts are committed solely for a valid journalistic purpose. Most of that time was spent as a staff reporter or news director of radio stations in the Washington. Is currently working in television. He sought to determine whether child prostitution
	OPINION/ORDER P.A. were on consolidated brief for plaintiff.
	GROSSMAN V. NOVELL, INC. Eggleton's name is misspelled. It should not have an
	OPINION/ORDER Before us is an appeal by Defendants Susan Graybill. Although we ordinarily do not have jurisdiction over an appeal from an order denying a motion to dismiss. The case was subsequently removed to the United States 2 District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Minuteman Press is a New York corporation which offers and sells franchises to
	OPINION/ORDER Because the resolution of Puertas's constitutional claims by the state courts was not contrary to. Officers and experts testified at trial that the dogs were most likely alerting to a lingering odor from drugs that recently had been removed from the safes. While that appeal was pending. It concludes that the allegations of public corruption in connection with the Puertas investigation were unfounded. We may grant a habeas petition if the state court's adjudication of the claim
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Plaintiff is a journalist who works in the print and television media. Defendant is the Director of the Public Affairs Division of the Baltimore City Police Department. Is responsible for the dissemination of information from the Department to the media. Plaintiff alleges that the defendant violated her constitutional rights by denying her access to Department information on the same terms that it was made available to other members of the news media. Snyder aired a story for WBAL TV that alleged that the Department might have attempted to cover up a prominent politician's connection to a young murder victim. 2 that he was tired of responding to Snyder's weekend pages. Stated that he claimed it was an off the record comment to another reporter (apparently at the assignment desk of WBAL TV). Then alleged that the other reporter had confirmed that the comment was not. Ringgold also asserted in the letter that Snyder was continuing to abuse the paging system by paging PIOs needlessly on weekends.
	OPINION/ORDER (2) they were overly broad and oppressive and therefore unreasonable. I The four subpoenas at issue in this case were directed respectively to (1)
	OPINION/ORDER 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.
	OPINION/ORDER Because the resolution of Puertas's constitutional claims by the state courts was not contrary to. Officers and experts testified at trial that the dogs were most likely alerting to a lingering odor from drugs that recently had been removed from the safes. While that appeal was pending. It concludes that the allegations of public corruption in connection with the Puertas investigation were unfounded. We may grant a habeas petition if the state court's adjudication of the claim
	ELLIS V. BARD, INC. (11/12/2002, NO. 01-15182) Are liable for her mother's brain damage because of their defective labeling and specifically their failure to warn adequately of the danger of having a person other than a doctor or patient activate the morphine pump that was prescribed for her mother. FACTS
	OPINION/ORDER The Class's complaint was filed under S 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
	OPINION/ORDER Was on brief for appellants. If the allegations are sufficient to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Then the denial of a motion to dismiss will be upheld. Nine young women were murdered in the New Bedford. The complaint alleges that appellants knew or should have known that Degrazia would take his own life as a result of these statements to the media. Arguing that Souza had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and that appellants were entitled to qualified immunity. The other defendants appellants are former first assistant district attorney Raymond Veary and former chief investigator Robert St. Although
	OPINION/ORDER That the application was frivolous. Abbo now contends that (1) the IJ's negative credibility finding was erroneous because the cited 1 No. 04 3303 Abbo v. Gonzales inconsistences were minor in character. His command of the Chaldean language is marginal. Abbo testified that he was born in the notably Chaldean northern village of Telkaif. Abbo claimed at his hearing that he was ordered to prepare food and wash clothing
	OPINION/ORDER Argued the case and was on the briefs for the defendant appellant. Argued the case and was on the briefs. Were on the briefs for the plaintiff appellee. Circuit Judge: Ted Allen was sentenced to twelve months imprisonment and three years supervised release after a plea of guilty for counterfeiting. Allen sold fourteen counterfeit $100 bills to an individual who knew that they were counterfeit. There was no charge in the superseding information to which Allen pleaded guilty alleging that Allen had manufactured any of the fourteen counterfeit $100 bills or possessed any counterfeiting devices or materials used in connection with them. Base Offense Level [USSG § 2B5.1] Increase because Defendant possessed or controlled counterfeiting paper similar to a distinctive paper Acceptance of Responsibility [§ 3E1.1] 9 +2 3. 2 9 Total Offense Level Allen was permitted to request additional departures and adjustments. The government was allowed to oppose such 530 UNITED STATES v. There was a provision in the plea agreement that the court was not bound by the plea agreement.
	OPINION/ORDER The Class's complaint was filed under S 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
	OPINION/ORDER The issue on appeal is whether. This case also presents the threshold issue whether we will adopt a
	OPINION/ORDER The Twins and Midwest Sports Channel (
	OPINION/ORDER Appellants are plaintiffs in a class action gender discrimination suit filed against West Publishing Company (West) in the Middle District of Florida. BACKGROUND The background leading to this appeal is as follows. Former West employees who were represented by one of Gosche's lawyers. Opperman was deposed in Colorado for about nine and one half hours over two days. Opperman was not asked questions regarding any romantic or sexual relationships he or other West executives may have had with West's female employees. After the order was modified and affirmed to permit Opperman to be
	OPINION/ORDER FACE gives aggrieved persons a right of action against whoever by
	OPINION/ORDER At the time this lawsuit was filed. He was the company's sole officer and director. Like other small companies with which Mabie was connected. Maxxon was engaged in developing a
	ACTION CHILD TV V. FCC
	OPINION/ORDER Crissy Simpson's right hand was severely injured in an accident at work while she was operating a power press machine. Concluding that he was fraudulently joined and therefore the court had diversity jurisdiction over the action. I. The Procedural Setting Simpson's complaint alleged that the power press machine could be operated in two control modes: with palm buttons that ensure the operator's hands are outside the die spaces when the press is operating. Or with a foot pedal that allows the press to operate when the operator's hands are in danger. Simpson alleged that supervisor Thomure
	OPINION/ORDER The results were below the investment community's expectations. The first investor suit was filed. More investor suits were filed. The action at hand is the product of the consolidation of these suits. BCF and certain of its principal officers and directors were sued under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
	OPINION/ORDER Published a book entitled Currier and Ives: America Imagined (the
	OPINION/ORDER Are liable for her mother's brain damage because of their defective labeling and specifically their failure to warn adequately of the danger of having a person other than a doctor or patient activate the morphine pump that was prescribed for her mother. I. FACTS The factual background in this case is largely undisputed. The Product The product at issue is the Bard Ambulatory Patient Controlled Analgesia Infusion Pump (the
	OPINION/ORDER The plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief and at the outset moved for summary judgment on the ground that the statute is plainly unconstitutional. We hold that the district court was in error as to its standing. Ripeness and mootness rulings and that the criminal libel statute is unconstitutional as applicable to statements regarding public officials and public figures.
	OPINION/ORDER Jurisdiction is proper under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a) (1994). L. No. 1041 The Eta Ndus also have two other children who were born in the United States. 208. The BIA is affirmed. His uncle were members of the Socialist Democratic Front (
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. In the United States District Court for the District of Maryland challenging various procedures and policies they allege are used by MCPS in the selection of students for participation in
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER
	AMER PETRO INST V. EPA
	OPINION/ORDER Appellants were charged with various offenses arising from their involvement with the Mexican Mafia. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. SHRYOCK 12843 of the several issues are contained in the portions of this opinion in which those issues are addressed. The factual recitals are based on trial testimony and other evidence that the jury could reasonably have credited in reaching its verdicts. Appellants were named in a thirty one count superseding indictment charging them and ten others.1 The charges stemmed from Appellants' involvement with the Mexican Mafia. Testified that the Mexican Mafia is a prison gang formed in the 1950s by Hispanic street gang members incarcerated at the Deuel Vocational Institution. Benjamin Peters and Victor Murillo were tried together with Appellants. Ambrose Gill's case was severed and he pled guilty following Appellants' trial. 1 12844 UNITED STATES v. As members were released from state custody. The gang had numerous associates who aspired to become members and were willing to commit crimes on the Mexican Mafia's behalf in hopes of attaining membership.
	OPINION/ORDER The individual defendants are: (1) John R. I. Because this is an appeal from the District Court's grant of a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Is engaged in the research. Pondimin was marketed together with another drug. Pondimin was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1973. Redux was recommended for approval by an FDA Advisory Committee in November 1995 and approved by the FDA in 1996. AHP represented to the FDA that these symptoms were reactions to the drugs and were not caused by any underlying heart condition. AHP's announcement similarly stated that the company was investigating
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Lori Wiechelt were on brief. P.C. was on brief.
	OPINION/ORDER Because their official positions were an intimidating asset in the execution of their plan. Because this sort of quasi private conspiracy by public officials was precisely the target of § 1983. I. The facts of this case are largely undisputed. Mary's Today is a weekly newspaper owned by Kenneth Rossignol and primarily serving St. Nor was this just
	OPINION/ORDER Magic Windows consisted of the following: a scrambled message on the inside of a beverage container label which could be decoded and read only after the beverage container was emptied. Glancy orally 2 advised the Coca Cola representatives that the information concerning Magic Windows was confidential. Glancy also advised the representatives that PKM was pursuing global patent protection on Magic Windows. The agreement went on to provide: [T]here is no obligation to maintain in confidence any information that: (i) at the time of disclosure is available to the public. (iii) is in [Coca Cola's or its subsidiaries' or affiliates' possession]. The U.S. patent application was rejected in July 1998 because Glancy's claims were anticipated by information in a 1993 international patent application filed by Virtual Image. Aspects of Magic Windows. 3 1 (iv) is rightfully received from a third party. [or] ... (vi) [Coca Cola] can establish was subsequently developed independently by [Coca Cola or its subsidiaries or affiliates] independently of any disclosure hereunder.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER 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 (
	OPINION/ORDER 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.
	OPINION/ORDER Bombaci claims that shortly after she was hired. If Bombaci's allegations are accepted. Was repugnant. Bent over in front of her and pretended to have sex with her.
	OPINION/ORDER The Wilsons allege that their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when officers entered their home and sought to execute an arrest warrant for their son. The Wilson's grandchild who was present during a portion of the actions that form the basis of this lawsuit. The material facts are not disputed. Federal and state law enforcement agents were engaged in a joint effort to apprehend fugitives with a history of armed. Maryland Sheriff's Department was formed to execute an outstanding arrest warrant. GREETINGS: YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED TO TAKE DOMINIC JEROME WILSON IF HE/SHE BE FOUND IN YOUR BAILIWICK .... Were to accompany the officers to observe and chronicle the execution of the warrant.3 The reporters' participation was part of a two week. The officers encountered a man dressed only in undergarments who was very 2 A panel of this court earlier issued a decision reversing the district court. These two individuals were later identified as the Wilsons. Was not present. The Wilsons asserted that their constitutional rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments were violated by the officers' actions in three ways: (1) the officers used excessive force in attempting to execute the arrest warrant.
	OPINION/ORDER P.A. was on brief for plaintiffs.
	OPINION/ORDER Was the Auction in this Case Permissibl e? 111 D. INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY These are consolidated appeals from the District Court's approval of a $3.2 billion settlement of a securities fraud class action brought against Cendant Corporation and its auditors. Both the settlement and the fee award are challenged in these appeals. The enormous size of both the settlement and the fee award presages a new generation of
	OPINION/ORDER Is a publicly traded company specializing in computer systems for telecommunications firms such as Sprint PCS. Jerry Fields is the lead plaintiff for a class of investors (together the Plaintiffs) who lost money by investing in Amdocs' stock during the class period of July 18. Amdocs defrauded the Plaintiffs by: 1) misleading Plaintiffs to believe that Amdocs' customer demand was stronger than it actually was. Are individually liable under the Securities Act as controlling persons. This is not surprising. United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. 3 1 predicted revenues were attributable to signed contracts. The percent of sales for a future period that were
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge This is a securities class action lawsuit brought on behalf of shareholders of the Chubb Corporation (
	OPINION/ORDER As the issues raised in this appeal are matters of first impression among the courts of appeals.
	OPINION/ORDER She contends the district court erred in concluding that the media defendants were not state actors. I. Anderson alleges that she was raped by her estranged husband while she was unconscious. So long as the broadcast was limited to a view of the perpetrator's face and was
	OPINION/ORDER He asserts that his sixth amendment right to a public trial was violated when the district judge closed the courtroom during the testimony of the children whom Mr. Thunder was accused of raping his daughter and her half sister and attempting to rape his daughter's aunt. Two of the alleged victims were twelve years old and the other was eleven. To exclude anyone lacking a direct interest in a case from a courtroom when a child is testifying. Defense counsel objected and renewed the objection each time that the courtroom was cleared for a child's testimony. The courtroom was open to spectators during the rest of the trial. We believe that this argument is untenable. We have an open government. Secret trials are inimical to the spirit of a republic. Especially when a citizen's liberty is at stake. Is necessarily a party to every criminal case. While the Supreme Court has held that the right of access to a criminal trial is
	OPINION/ORDER I. Johns was president and a director of Vista 2000. Vista was a public company. Johns was called upon to perform functions in the role of
	OPINION/ORDER Appeal from a grant of summary judgment to a newspaper on its claim for a declaratory judgment that its reporters' telephone records are privileged from a potential grand jury subpoena. Cooperation was refused. The Times then brought the 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 present action seeking a declaratory judgment that phone records of its reporters in the hands of third party telephone providers are shielded from a grand jury subpoena by reporter's privileges protecting the identity of confidential sources arising out of both the common law and the First Amendment. 1 Judge Sweet granted the Times' motion for summary judgment on its claims that disclosure of the records was barred by both a common law and a First Amendment reporter's privilege. Although the privileges were qualified. We also hold that no First Amendment protection is available to the Times on these facts in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Branzburg v. BACKGROUND A federal grand jury in Chicago is investigating how two Times reporters obtained information about the government's 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 imminent plans to freeze the assets and/or search the offices of Holy Land Foundation (
	OPINION/ORDER Was on brief. Were on brief. We reverse.I.
	OPINION/ORDER Lusingo argues that the BIA's ruling denying his asylum claim is
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the brief were Teresa T. With him on the brief was Bruce C. FOIA's general disclosure rule is subject to nine statutory exceptions. This court and others have recognized consistently that I.R.C. s 6103(a) is a non disclosure statute falling within the scope of FOIA Exemption 3. Like CBN: If an organization described in section 501(c) or (d) is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) for any tax able year. The application filed by the organization with respect to which the Secretary made his determination that such organization was entitled to exemption under section 501(a). Any letter or other document issued by the Internal Revenue Service with respect to such application shall be open to public inspec tion at the national office of the Internal Revenue Ser vice. 26 U.S.C. s 6104(a)(1)(A).1 I.R.C. s 6104 also requires an exempt organization to make available for public inspection a 1 All editions of the United States Code since 1970 have actually read
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Line 25 a comma is inserted after the word
	OPINION/ORDER Which were later consolidated. The plaintiffs alleged that Food Lion affirmatively misled the market and failed to disclose that its earnings during the 2 1/2year period were artificially inflated due to its misrepresentations about and failure to disclose widespread violations of federal labor laws and pervasive. They alleged that these violations and practices were attributable to Food Lion's
	OPINION/ORDER The district court held that Colonial's claims were barred by the four year2 statute of limitations. Because the printing press was delivered on or about July 10.
	OPINION/ORDER The suit was later amended to name a total of twenty one plaintiffs. The plaintiffs were scattered across Ohio and as far away as Texas. That they were unaware that their illnesses were the result of Chemetron's conduct at the time Chemetron filed for bankruptcy. They therefore were discharged by the court's confirmation order. I. The underlying facts are set forth in this court's prior opinion in this case. It demolished a portion of its Harvard Avenue facility and placed a quantity of rubble from the demolition in the Bert Avenue landfill.2 This rubble was apparently contaminated due to radiation exposure. Chemetron was involved in periodic clean up efforts at both the Harvard Avenue and Bert Avenue sites at the direction of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (
	OPINION/ORDER The response thereto were circulated to the full court. A vote was requested. It is ORDERED that the petitions be denied. Is attached. A separate statement by Circuit Judge Tatel. Is attached. A separate statement by Circuit Judge Garland. Is attached. Dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc: The important First Amendment protections implicated in these cases are obvious. Which was first enacted in late 1974. That there are different views regarding the proper application of Zerilli in Privacy Act cases is evident. Confidentiality is often essential to establishing a relationship with an informant. I believe this case is of
	LAKESHORE BROADCASTING, INC V. FCC Jr. argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs was Anne Thomas Paxson. Pamela L. On the brief were Christopher J. the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States by dismissing Lakeshore's application for failure to meet a deadline of which Lakeshore was never given personal notice. Because the Commission's policy is lawful. necessity will be served.
	OPINION/ORDER This is a whistleblower action brought by Adrienne Anderson (Anderson) against Metro Wastewater Reclamation District (Metro) pursuant to various environmental statutes which prohibit discrimination against
	03-2001 -- HARDEMAN V. CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE -- 08/05/2004 Hardeman alleged 1) that she was terminated from her employment as a Department Director of the Albuquerque Convention Center because of her race and/or because she exercised her First Amendment free speech rights. 2) that she was subjected to disparaging public comments and/or denied a post termination contract in retaliation for her association with African American groups. 3) that her due process liberty interests were violated. The district court dismissed Ms. All other claims were submitted to a jury. Except the claim that she was discharged because of her race. Who is African American. Was appointed to the position of Department Director of the Albuquerque Convention Center by the newly elected Mayor Jim Baca. She was a cabinet level. Hardeman was involved in three incidents that led her to criticize or question the actions of the Baca Administration and her supervisor. Hardeman claims that she was later subjected to disparaging public comments and denied a post termination contract that was promised to her because of her perceived association with African American groups. The first speech related incident leading to Ms.
	THE CHAMBERLAIN GROUP, INC., V. SKYLINK TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Argued for plaintiff appellant. With him on the brief were John F. Argued for defendant appellee. With him on the brief were Andra Barmash Greene. Communications Industry Association. With him on the brief was Matthew Schruers. We have previously ruled on what is required for plaintiffs to plead scienter sufficiently under
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the brief were Allen P. Best were on the brief for appellee Jane Mayer and Advanced Magazine Publishers Inc. 'if you cooperate with the media we will destroy you.'
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the brief were Frank J. With him on the brief was Lile H. Which was opened in 1898 by César Ritz. The Ritz Hotel is one of the most luxurious and renowned hotels in the world. These products are sold under a variety of registered marks. Which was derived from its founder's last name. Shen's appeal is moot. 04 1063. The board found that while shower curtains are closely related to Shen's products. RHL's PUTTING ON THE RITZ mark is dissimilar to Shen's RITZ mark in terms of appearance. Again the board found that the goods described in RHL's applications were related to Shen's goods. That the differences in the marks were sufficient to prevent any likelihood of confusion. Finding that there was a likelihood of confusion because cooking classes require the use of kitchen textiles. 1076 that gloves are too related to barbeque mitts considering the similarity of the marks. Whether there is a likelihood of confusion is a question of law based on underlying facts. The PTO may refuse to register a trademark that is so similar to a registered mark
	DOLLY KYLE BROWNING V. WILLIAM J. CLINTON Et al.
	OPINION/ORDER Appeal from a grant of summary judgment to a newspaper on its claim for a declaratory judgment that its reporters' telephone records are privileged from a potential grand jury subpoena. Cooperation was refused. The Times then brought the present action seeking a declaratory judgment that phone records 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 of its reporters in the hands of third party telephone providers are shielded from a grand jury subpoena by reporter's privileges protecting the identity of confidential sources arising out of both the common law and the First Amendment. 1 Judge Sweet granted the Times' motion for summary judgment on its claims that disclosure of the records was barred by both a common law and a First Amendment reporter's privilege. Although the privileges were qualified. We also hold that no First Amendment protection is available to the Times on these facts in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Branzburg v. BACKGROUND A federal grand jury in Chicago is investigating how two Times reporters obtained information about the government's imminent plans to freeze the assets and/or search the offices of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Holy Land Foundation (
	OPINION/ORDER The crux of Shah's complaint is that defendants' conflicts of interest arising from their issuing analyst reports rating and evaluating actual or potential investment banking clients of the firm together with the firm's failure to disclose these improper business practices to its own shareholders artificially inflated the price of Morgan Stanley stock purchased between July 1. Finding that plaintiff was on inquiry notice more than two years before filing suit. The district court concluded that 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 the claims were time barred and granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. affirm. We analysts performed investment banking functions and were compensated based on their effectiveness in securing investment banking business for the firm. It is alleged. Classes of investors have filed numerous lawsuits against Morgan Stanley and other financial institutions alleging 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 securities fraud based on the conflicts uncovered by the agency investigations.
	OPINION/ORDER Vladeck was on brief. Were on brief. (FOIA) of internet addresses and programming materials generated by the United States Information Agency (USIA).2 The district court granted summary judgment in favor of USIA on the ground that USIA's records
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs were Samuel C. With him on the briefs was Joshua L. With her on the brief were Leonard R. With him on the brief were Samuel C. That the strikers were unfair labor practice strikers. While the unions object to the Board's determination that one employer's unilateral implementation of a change in work assignment rules was lawful. The employers' petition for review is granted. The unions' is denied. Each paper is responsi ble for its news and editorial operations. Are handled by DNA. The employees of these three companies are represented by 12 unions each repre senting a separate bargaining unit of the papers or DNA. Petitioners are six of these unions which compose the Metro politan Council of Newspaper Unions (the Council). Two of the unions in the Council are particularly important to this case: the Detroit Typographical Union No. 18 (DTU). Representing editorial employees at the News.1 Each newspaper and DNA is responsible for its own labor negotiations. Noneconomic issues were negotiated between DNA and each individual union.
	OPINION/ORDER We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. I. The underlying facts of this case are undisputed and are comprehensively set forth in the district court's published opinion. Is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dean Foods. Which was damaged as a result. There is no dispute that because Dean Dairy issued monitoring reports to Union Township on a monthly basis. The United States moved for and was granted summary judgment on the issue of Dean Dairy's liability for the CWA violations. The action against the Municipal Authority of Union Township was settled and therefore the Authority is not a party to this appeal. Its appeal is limited to the amount of the civil penalty imposed. The district court found these efforts were belated and ineffective. It was only the construction of a $865. Important to the issue before us is that Dean Dairy considered various options to meet its permit obligations but.
	OPINION/ORDER The court decided that the section was a content neutral ordinance leaving open to the plaintiff ample alternative channels of communication and that it therefore did not violate either the First or Fourteenth Amendments. We conclude that although the standards employed by Chapter 64 are constitutionally permissible. The procedures it employs to effect them are not. Is a resident of the Architectural and Historic District (the
	SCHWARTZ V. CELESTIAL SEASONINGS, INC. This court reverses and remands. (1) Judge Henry was not present during oral argument. He was vouched in. The IPO Prospectus revealed that Celestial was introducing new ready to drink (
	OPINION/ORDER DeBenedictis's central claim is that Merrill's Fund Registration 3 Statements (
	OPINION/ORDER The court decided that the section was a content neutral ordinance leaving open to the plaintiff ample alternative channels of communication and that it therefore did not violate either the First or Fourteenth Amendments. We conclude that although the standards employed by Chapter 64 are constitutionally permissible. The procedures it employs to effect them are not. Is a resident of the Architectural and Historic District (the
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the brief were Jan M. Of counsel was Emily M. With him on the brief were David T. Of counsel on the brief were H. Of counsel was Thomas Andrew Culbert. With him on the brief were Matthew D. With him on the brief were David A. With him on the brief was Craig M. Eolas alleged that certain aspects of Microsoft's Internet Microsoft denied infringement and Explorer (IE) product incorporate its invention. asserted that the claims were invalid and unenforceable. A reexamination of the '906 Patent was ordered by the Director and is currently pending in the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The inventors have consistently maintained that
	OPINION/ORDER Rudman LLP were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellee. The SEC cross appeals from the portion of the district court's judgment imposing sanctions against the SEC for refusing to stipulate until mid trial that no telephone call to Happ was made from the office of the SEC's main witness on June 25. Happ was a Director. One was that shipments had been impacted for the second quarter due to a jurisdictional dispute between the United States Departments of Commerce and State with respect to export of some products. Hanley testified that
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the brief were Henry C. Of counsel was Courtney Towle of Houston. With him on the brief were Joseph J. Its denial of judgment as a matter of law that the patent is invalid and unenforceable. Because the jury verdict of direct infringement was not supported by substantial evidence. BACKGROUND ACCO is the owner of U.S. The patents in suit are entitled
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Associates were on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief. Burke were on brief. Was on brief. This civil rights case requires us to decide whether police officers of the Town of Walpole and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of State Police (
	03-6206 -- JENNINGS V. CITY OF STILLWATER -- 09/14/2004 Four members of the OSU football team whom we will refer to. Plaintiff claims that she was raped. The football players maintain that the encounter was consensual. The football players were not charged with any crime as a result of these events. In this suit brought under 42 U.S.C.
	FREUND V. BUTTERWORTH (1/22/1999, NO. 93-5317) The crux of Freund's petition was that he was deprived of his right under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to effective assistance of trial counsel because his lawyers labored under significant conflicts of interest that stemmed primarily from their prior representation of Freund's non testifying. Among Freund's symptoms were impaired memory. His main occupation was a full time criminal. He often had them use cocaine with him immediately before they did anything else. Trent claimed to have ties with the local police through his work as a confidential informant. Four such persons were at Trent's apartment. On the night of the murder: three testified at Freund's trial and the fourth was the victim.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Inc. were on brief for appellant third party witness James Taricani.
	OPINION/ORDER We will affirm the district court's order dismissing the complaint on the ground that appellants have not alleged an injury to business or property cognizable under RICO. Appellants instituted this purported class action on behalf of themselves and all members of a class 4 consisting
	OPINION/ORDER Claim to have had regular and unwelcome contact with the plaque while entering and walking past the courthouse. Would not have viewed Chester County's refusal to remove the plaque as an endorsement of religion. Is not highlighted or displayed prominently. Is one of several historical relics displayed on the courthouse. A bronze plaque containing the text of the Ten Commandments and other biblical passages (
	OPINION/ORDER A public school teacher asserts that he was punished because of the principal's belief that he had called the press about a matter of public interest at the school. We will affirm the grant of summary judgment in favor of the principal. Is an English teacher at Truman High School in Bristol Township. Who at that time was en route to the school. Plaintiff denied that he had called him or was even acquainted with him. Was unable to identify the caller.
	OPINION/ORDER A public school teacher asserts that he was punished because of the principal's belief that he had called the press about a matter of public interest at the school. We will affirm the grant of summary judgment in favor of the principal. Is an English teacher at Truman High School in Bristol Township. Who at that time was en route to the school. Plaintiff denied that he had called him or was even acquainted with him. Was unable to identify the caller. The complaint in the district court alleged that the removal from extracurricular positions was a retaliatory action by defendant pursuant to his belief that plaintiff had exercised his First Amendment rights. You did not call the Courier Times? 3 Answer: That is correct. * * * * * * * * * * Question: Have you at any time. Answer: No. * * * * * * * * * * Question: Have [your fellow teachers] .. . in the last five years. The district court concluded that
	OPINION/ORDER VENEMAN is substituted for her predecessor DAN GLICKMAN. NORTON is substituted for her predecessor BRUCE BABBITT. Is hereby amended as follows: 1. 2. It is not preempted by the ESA.
	OPINION/ORDER Inc. (collectively Titan) held a press conference and announced Titan was filing a RICO lawsuit against the United Steelworkers of America.
	KENNETH D. HUFFMAN V. OPM Argued for respondent.
	OPINION/ORDER Inc. (
	OPINION/ORDER Pease were on brief appellants. Grau was on brief for Amoskeag Bank Shares. Donald Dufresne was on brief for Allen. The question on this appeal is whether appellants' Third Amended Complaint states a claim for fraud under federal securities law. We have concluded that portions of it are entitled to survive. Defendant Amoskeag Bank Shares (
	OPINION/ORDER Defendant was convicted in the state courts of Ohio on two counts of aggravated murder with firearm specification under Ohio Rev. His appeal raises four issues: (1) whether appellant was denied his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights through the use of unconstitutionally obtained evidence against him at trial. (3) whether appellant was denied his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation when the prosecution was allowed to introduce into evidence hearsay statements. (4) whether appellant was denied his Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial by the cumulative effect of prosecutorial 1 The defendant was found guilty of one count of murder in the death of Charles Sponhaltz with firearm specification and one count of aggravated murder of Steven Vargo with two capital specifications. 2 and 4 involved no unreasonable application of clearly established federal law and that the admission of the hearsay statement in issue 3 was harmless. Steven Vargo and Charles Sponhaltz were found dead on a rural road in Belmont County.
	OPINION/ORDER Williams's appeal is now before the court. After receiving word via walkie talkie that the situation was secure. Who were roommates. Jessica answered the door and told Wynn that Madison was not home and Howard was asleep. Went back in
	OPINION/ORDER At issue in the present dispute between the Union and the Company is work known as
	OPINION/ORDER So we state the facts as they are stated in the complaint to determine whether the complaint states a claim upon which relief could be granted. 1 we may also properly consider SEC filings incorporated by reference in the complaint.2 Nothing has been proved in this case because it was dismissed before the occasion arose for any proof. Larkin and the other defendants were officers and directors of Nellcor. Nellcor announced that it was making a very large acquisition. This raised the obvious question of how Nellcor could expect to make money by spending almost a half billion dollars to acquire a company that was losing money. Would have much greater financial strength because of its size. Would have lower overhead than the combined overhead of the two companies operating separately. The theory of the complaint is that the merger was a failure and that the Nellcor principals knew that almost from the start. Misleading the stock market into overvaluing their stock based on a false impression that the merger was going well.
	OPINION/ORDER MLP is a modest sized Minneapolis based publisher of fiction. Eventually dissolved and the assets were transferred to a Minnesota company of the same name incorporated as a nonprofit corporation in 1993. Both of whom were corporate officers and members of the board of directors. Have the book printed for 2 publication. Nora submitted the book and it was accepted for publication through MLP's First Series Award for Poetry program.3 MLP told Dr. Was not a published poet. 3 3 sale. Nora contends he could not have violated the Lanham Act when he used MLP's trade name to market his book because he had authority to act on behalf of MLP as its president and was in fact acting on MLP's behalf when he published his book of poetry. The book actually is an MLP product and there can be no claim for false designation of origin under the Lanham Act. Nora was MLP's president is insufficient to show his actions were MLP's actions. Such transactions are presumptively fraudulent and to overcome this presumption the executive must show by clear proof he acted with impartiality and fairness to the corporation.
	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.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER We decide whether Flowers's claims are timely and. A few days later Flowers (doubtless realizing that honesty is the best policy after all) sold her story to the Star. Later news reports suggested that the tapes may have been selectively edited. The court held that most of Flowers's allegations are time barred. Holding that some of the statements are merely rhetorical hyperbole and others are opinions based on earlier news reports. There was nothing left to conspire about. CARVILLE 7 defamation in Nevada is two years. While the statute in other potentially relevant states is only one. Some of Flowers's claims are only timely under Nevada's longer limitations period. Before Flowers filed suit. [2] Because this is a diversity case. Many states have passed
	OPINION/ORDER Plaintiff Travis Wade was greasing a bearing on a concrete cutting saw manufactured by Defendant. Was pulled in. Was severed. Alleging that the saw was defectively designed and was not accompanied by adequate warnings. Which is owned by Plaintiff's half brother Brad Wade. Which is directly in front of the operator as he or she uses the saw. If you do not have an operator's manual. Are the words
	OPINION/ORDER Nelson were on brief for appellant.
	OPINION/ORDER While the Allees were carrying out the robbery. Demanded the keys to a pickup truck that was parked in the driveway. All three defendants were arrested. He asserted that he was not involved in the robbery or the shooting. Allee made a number of phone calls to various people wherein he made statements that the prosecution argued were attempts to create an alibi. Was recaptured some four hours later. There was substantial news coverage of the crimes. Allee was convicted of conspiracy to commit bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d). Allee was sentenced to concurrent 235 month sentences on each count except the two § 924(c)(1) offenses. He was sentenced to 84 months' imprisonment on the first § 924(c)(1) charge and 300 months' imprisonment on the second. Allee was sentenced to a total of 535 months' imprisonment. He argues that the court erred in admitting tapes of telephone calls made while he was awaiting trial because their prejudice outweighed their probative value and because they were inadmissible character evidence.
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs was Anne Thomas Paxson. On the brief were Christopher J. The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States by dismissing Lakeshore's application for failure to meet a deadline of which Lakeshore was never given personal notice. Because the Commission's policy is lawful. Necessity will be served.
	OPINION/ORDER Gerald Jarrett were convicted of conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994). Jarrett were also convicted of use of a minor in a conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 861(a)(1) (1994). Burchett also determined that the phone number belonged to Maria Scales and was assigned to an apartment at 909 East Eighteenth Street in Minneapolis. She informed Burchett that the drugs were being stored at a Red Roof Inn in Plymouth. Were being sold out of the 909 East Eighteenth Street apartment building. A hotel employee told Burchett that the individuals who had stayed in the rooms registered to Cleveland and Hines were currently staying in a room registered to Fernando Davis. Davis was identified as the 5 driver and Paris Wilson and Steve Howard as the passengers. Was never apprehended. Substantial sentences were imposed. Further facts will be recited as is necessary in our analysis of the issues presented by the appellants. I. The appellants contend that Agent Burchett's testimony as to the out of court statements of other witnesses was inadmissible hearsay.
	OPINION/ORDER Petitioner was a thirty one year old male citizen of Iraq who entered the United States on or about May 1. He is an ethnic Chaldean who practices the Catholic religion. There is evidence that Assyrian and Chaldean Christians are considered by other Iraqis to constitute a distinct non Arab ethnic minority. Which is also considered an application for non discretionary withholding of removal. The parties and the interpreter were all present in a courtroom in Detroit. Petitioner claims that he began to be harassed at the age of 15 when he was forced to attend mandatory religion classes in Islam at his high school. He was arrested one day at school for distributing anti religion and anti government fliers. He was detained for about 33 days at various locations. He was released and1returned home. He claims he was not allowed to return. Petitioner testified that he was conscripted into the Iraqi Army in February 1991. That he was detained for three months. When he was found reading the Bible in his barracks.
	OPINION/ORDER We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. Is a pharmaceutical company that develops and markets medicines to treat chronic infectious diseases. Is an antibiotic that had previously been administered through intravenous injection. The introduction of TOBI was an advance in the treatment of cystic fibrosis patients. TOBI delivers tobramycin in greater concentrations than is possible through intravenous treatment. PathoGenesis told its wholesalers by letter that the Company was increasing the price of TOBI by at least seven percent. PathoGen 2 Sales of TOBI accounted for over 98% of PathoGenesis' annual sales. 3 TOBI sales in the introductory first quarter of 1998 (
	OPINION/ORDER Louison and Merrick and Louison were on brief. This appeal presents a problematic First Amendment question as to whether the plaintiff was a
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER The dismissal of which is the subject of this appeal. After the IRS was found liable for race discrimination and retaliation against an African American employee in its Poughkeepsie office. HVBP published an article that was highly critical of the IRS. Was notified that HVBP would be audited by the IRS. 2 after this report was initially rejected by an IRS hearing officer. Because HVBP was delinquent in paying payroll taxes. The IRS seized all of HVBP's accounting records relating to the period in which delinquent payroll taxes were alleged. These requests were unsuccessful. Tax liens were filed against HVBP for the period of allegedly delinquent payroll taxes. An administrative hearing was convened.
	OPINION/ORDER This is the fourth appeal to come before us in this series of disputes between the parties.2 We affirm. Porous charged that Pall's descriptions of the previous litigation were deceptive. We have carefully reviewed the In Porous Media Corp. v. Which is foreclosed by our previous opinion involving the same parties. Porous alleges that two of Pall's counterclaims during the second Lanham Act case (Porous II) were brought
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: This is a political firing case. Alleging that her First Amendment and due process rights were violated. We reverse the award of summary judgment to the defendants on the First Amendment claim because political allegiance is not an appropriate job requirement for a jailer. We affirm the award of summary judgment to the county on the federal claims because the sheriff was not acting for the county when he fired Ms. Knight did not have a property interest in her job. The case is remanded for trial on the First Amendment claim against the sheriff and for reinstatement of the state law claims. Knight's job duties as a jailer are not disputed. The other facts are recited. Some justifiable inferences are drawn. Who was a Democrat. Who is a sworn law enforcement officer. She did not have a written contract. She was given a copy of the Rockingham County employee handbook. Knight was responsible for the processing. Knight filled in as a cook when help was short in the jail's kitchen. Knight's position (Jailer I or II) was
	00-1415 -- BELL V. MANSPEAKER -- 04/10/2002 The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Defendant appellant R.M. Fisher was granted summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. Bell was denied press credentials but apparently was able to view the trial on the day of the opening arguments as a member of the public. Bell who had just exited the courthouse front door and was walking in front of the courthouse. Bell was questioned by Mr. Qualified immunity is sufficient to shield officials in the performance of their public duties. Id. The Court has been
	OPINION/ORDER Section 2 the first amicus curiae is corrected to read
	MITSUBISHI HEAVY IND V. U.S. Ltd.
	OPINION/ORDER I. The basic facts in the case are these: In May 1994. Jawaid repeatedly forced her to have oral. Norelus also said Jawaid forced her to have sex with his roommate. Valladares said she also visited the two Denny's restaurants where Norelus claimed to have been abused. Valladares said a Denny's employee told her (in Valladares's words) that 3 Jawaid
	OPINION/ORDER Revives securities fraud actions that were time barred before the effective date of the SOA. Determining that the new limitations period revives actions that previously were time barred. A
	OPINION/ORDER The gravamen of its complaint was that the managed health care organizations impaired the quality of health care provided by psychiatrists to their patients by refusing to authorize necessary psychiatric treatment. The principal issue on appeal is whether the Pennsylvania Psychiatric Society has properly pleaded associational and third party standing. P. 12(b)(6) was premature. We will vacate and remand for further proceedings. 1. SS 1001 1461.2 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. The case was removed from state court under ERISA's civil enforcement provision. To discern which claims are preempted.
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Finding that the defendants' alleged actions could not have violated clearly established law at the time of these events. Were involved in a conspiracy to terminate them from county employment. This conspiracy was allegedly undertaken in retaliation for appellees' exercise of several constitutional rights. The doctrine applies when the conduct of government employees
	OPINION/ORDER The issues on which Coplin sought injunctive and declaratory relief were to be presented in a bench trial while the monetary damages and attorney's fees claims were to be heard. I. The FPATV Committee is a regulatory and advisory board created by the Council. The primary responsibility of the FPATV Committee is to supervise. To have the case tried by a United States Magistrate Judge. 2 1 Under FPATV Rule I(A).
	OPINION/ORDER This was the first quarter in which Hanger's financial results included the results of the new NovaCare division. Stein explained that Hanger's disappointing results were attributable to three factors: (1) additional losses of former NovaCare practitioners. That same day (the first trading day after Hanger's negative financial news was released). At issue here is whether Appellants adequately pleaded the first two elements. Based on our conclusion below that Appellants have not adequately pleaded their claim under § 10(b) and Rule 10b 5. A plaintiff
	UNITED STATES V. MCVEIGH Which has thus far received virtually no judicial attention: whether a pretrial order prohibiting victim impact witnesses from attending the criminal prosecution in which they are slated to testify is subject to review at the urging of either the government or the nonparty witnesses themselves. That it is not. Both seeking to secure an alternative avenue of review in the event their appeals were deemed defective. The briefs of the parties and amici(1) have now been filed. I The government's right to appeal in criminal cases is subject to unique limitations. Government appeals in criminal cases were considered verboten. Two general rules have survived this historical evolution: the government may only initiate criminal appeals based on specific statutory authority. There is a presumption against government criminal appeals. The cases are therefore ordered submitted on the briefs.
	OPINION/ORDER Insisting that a biased jury that was convened for a trial in an improper venue convicted him after considering impermissible hearsay evidence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291. MOORE 14433 I We set forth first John Casey's testimony about how his wife was shot and died. Rosemary Casey was shot by a bullet fired from John Casey's semiautomatic .30 06 caliber hunting rifle. John Casey decided to oil his rifle by spraying Break Free oil down the barrel because the barrel was rusty. After placing a piece of cardboard and some rags over a garbage can which served as a makeshift workspace he planned to use to clean the gun John Casey moved the slide on the rifle back and no shell ejected or was visible. John Casey told the jury that while he held a rag over the rifle's action (to catch the cleaning solvent as it was forced through the barrel). His key defensive testimony was that he then unintentionally touched the trigger. She was later flown to Seattle for treatment but. Made it impossible for him to have a fair trial there.
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Wells's defamation claims are based on statements Liddy made alleging that Wells was involved with a call girl ring while working as a secretary at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in 1972. This court further held that Wells was a private individual. That while a showing of actual malice was required to recover punitive and presumed damages. She needed only to prove that Liddy was negligent in making the statements to recover compensatory damages. The jury was unable to render a verdict. Holding that no reasonable jury could find that Liddy was negligent in making the allegedly false statements. Wells was employed at the DNC offices in Washington. All seven were indicted by a federal grand jury on September 15. Liddy was charged with multiple counts of burglary. Was tried. Wiretapping charges but then claimed that he was pressured to plead guilty and lie during the district court proceedings. Liddy presented an alternative theory behind the Watergate These past events that are more completely recounted in our earlier opinion.
	DONALD H. RUMSFELD V. APPLIED COMPANIES Filed a response to the petition for the appellant. With him on the response were Robert D. Assistant Director.
	JUDD V. HALEY (5/9/2001, NO. 00-12786) That his right to a public trial under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution was denied by the Alabama trial court. We conclude that the doctrine of procedural default is inapplicable in this case. Judd's constitutional argument is meritorious. Remand the case with instructions directing the district court to grant Judd's habeas petition.
	OPINION/ORDER (2) his trial should have been transferred or the jury sequestered due to extensive media coverage of the crimes with which he was charged. BACKGROUND The facts are taken from the evidence presented at trial and are viewed in the light most favorable to the government. No. 04 5780 Goins and Justin Jones first met when the two were patients in the psychiatric ward of an army hospital at Fort Benning. Both men had gone AWOL and thought they were likely to be discharged from service in the army. Goins suggested that the two could rob a bank in Virginia once they were discharged. The loan was made in anticipation of a tax refund of the same amount. In testimony Goins contends should have been excluded. Goins represented that he was an undercover police officer investigating drug activity. Jones followed Goins's lead and pretended that he too was an undercover officer. Goins told Woltz he suspected the cash was drug money but told Woltz he could have the money back if his supervisor (Woltz worked at a nearby restaurant) confirmed it was actually tip money or wages.
	OPINION/ORDER VENEMAN is substituted for her predecessor DAN GLICKMAN. NORTON is substituted for her predecessor BRUCE BABBITT. The action is a challenge to Proposition 4. Five different groups of parties are involved in this litigation. The state parties and sponsors appeal the district court's summary judgment granting declaratory relief to the Audubon plaintiffs on the ground that relevant portions of Proposition 4 are preempted by the federal Endangered Species Act (
	OPINION/ORDER I. Background In March 2000 Alicea Hernandez was hired by the Archdiocese of Chicago to fill the post of Hispanic Communications Manager. Alicea Hernandez claims that while working for the Church she was discriminated against on the basis of her gender and national origin as well as retaliated against for filing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge. No. 02 2280 3 While all this discrimination was allegedly occurring. Alicea Hernandez was actively taking issue with the Church on its relations with the Hispanic community. We are faced with a somewhat unusual procedural background. While it is true that Alicea Hernandez did not respond to the Church's motion to dismiss and the district court granted that motion. Any waiver arguments the Church had could have been made in response to the motion to reconsider. We have the pro se status of Alicea Hernandez at the time the motion to dismiss was filed1 and the confusion over the hearing that was scheduled for the motion on April 16. She gained her present counsel after the motion to dismiss was granted but before she filed her motion to reconsider.
	97-6111 -- U.S. V. JOHNSON -- 01/29/1998 The cases are therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
	JUDD V. HALEY (5/9/2001, NO. 00-12786) That his right to a public trial under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution was denied by the Alabama trial court. We conclude that the doctrine of procedural default is inapplicable in this case. Judd's constitutional argument is meritorious. Remand the case with instructions directing the district court to grant Judd's habeas petition.
	99-5117 -- SPRINGER V. HUSTLER MAGAZINE -- 10/28/1999 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
	FREUND V. BUTTERWORTH (1/22/1999, NO. 93-5317) The crux of Freund's petition was that he was deprived of his right under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to effective assistance of trial counsel because his lawyers labored under significant conflicts of interest that stemmed primarily from their prior representation of Freund's non testifying. Among Freund's symptoms were impaired memory. His main occupation was a full time criminal. He often had them use cocaine with him immediately before they did anything else. Trent claimed to have ties with the local police through his work as a confidential informant. Four such persons were at Trent's apartment. On the night of the murder: three testified at Freund's trial and the fourth was the victim.
	OPINION/ORDER So we state the facts as they are stated in the complaint to determine whether the complaint states a claim upon which relief could be granted. 1 we may also properly consider SEC filings incorporated by reference in the complaint.2 Nothing has been proved in this case because it was dismissed before the occasion arose for any proof. Larkin and the other defendants were officers and directors of Nellcor. Nellcor announced that it was making a very large acquisition. This raised the obvious question of how Nellcor could expect to make money by spending almost a half billion dollars to acquire a company that was losing money. Would have much greater financial strength because of its size. Would have lower overhead than the combined overhead of the two companies operating separately. The theory of the complaint is that the merger was a failure and that the Nellcor principals knew that almost from the start. Misleading the stock market into overvaluing their stock based on a false impression that the merger was going well.
	OPINION/ORDER Is a sixty six year old paraplegic on California's death row. Daniels was convicted of two counts of first degree murder for the shooting deaths of police officers Dennis Doty and Phil Trust. Daniels was sentenced to death on January 31. It is necessary to first review the events surrounding a bank robbery Daniels committed in 1980. Daniels was shot nine times by police officers. Daniels was rendered a paraplegic and confined to a wheelchair. On the same day Daniels was sentenced. Although Daniels's physical distress was somewhat lessened. Roth was disturbed by Daniels's psychological condition and expression of suicidal thoughts. Daniels was released on bond. He was beaten. Daniels was ordered to surrender to custody. A warrant was issued for his arrest. Officers Doty and Trust were sent to arrest Daniels at the residence of James Cornish. They were shown to Daniels's bedroom by his caretaker. Cornish's infant son were in the house at the time. While Ross was assisting Daniels with getting dressed. Doty was lying on the floor.
	OPINION/ORDER All local exchange carriers are required to
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: A grandmother alleges in this civil rights action that she was deprived of the custody of her granddaughter for five years in violation of rights secured by the Constitution. The defendants are Chester County Children & Youth Services (
	OPINION/ORDER Her initial asylum application was based on the claim that her husband was detained and tortured by the police after attending a political demonstration. Vardhami's claims were found by the immigration judge (IJ) not to be credible. Protection under the Convention Against Torture were denied. When her husband was allegedly imprisoned for a month after attending a demonstration against the ruling Communist Party and tortured during his imprisonment. Vardhami explained her failure to disclose the rape in the previous application as follows: My husband is a typical Albanian man who rules his home as a patriarch and controls his wife and children. For something which was forced upon me. Vardhami claimed in the second application to have learned about her husband's arrest through a neighbor. Vardhami's testimony before the IJ about the September 1998 violence was partially consistent with the second application. She claimed to have escaped the violence at the demonstration and to have left before her husband was arrested.
	OPINION/ORDER Goss was the major manufacturer of large printing presses in the United States for more than a century and enjoyed dominance in the United States printing press market into the late 1990s. A clawback statute is a countermeasure that enables defendants who have paid a multiple damage judgment in a foreign country to recover the multiple portion of that judgment from the plaintiff. Canada that allows companies which have paid treble damages under United States antitrust law judgments to
	OPINION/ORDER Ltd. was on brief for appellant. Inc. were on brief for appellees. Standard of Review Standard of Review Our review of summary judgment decisions is de novo. Summary judgment is appropriate only when
	MACUBA V. DEBOER (10/29/1999, NO. 98-2651) They contended that they were immune from suit under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity. We reverse. I. Joseph Macuba was. Part of his job was to investigate complaints against builders and the failure of his co workers to enforce county building codes. Questioned DeBoer about the situation. This was not the first time that an investigation conducted by Macuba resulted in inquiries from the media. He was elected in November. Matthew sent an anonymous letter criticizing Macuba to the Board of Commissioners.
	OXFORD ASSET MGMT., LTD. V. JAHARIS (7/16/2002, NO. 99-11690) (Kos) is a pharmaceutical company that develops and markets prescription drugs. The offering price was $42.75. 000 shares were sold in the secondary offering. 000 shares.
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs were William T. Jr. were on the brief for amicus curiae in support of petitioner. With him on the brief were Christopher J. With him on the brief were Thomas F. Qwest contends that the Order is contrary to s 1905 of the Trade Secrets Act. Is a wholly owned subsidiary of U S West. That the Commission has failed to explain how its Order is consistent with its policy regarding the treatment of confiden tial information. The Region al Bell Operating Companies (
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs was Jan Witold Baran. With him on the brief were Lawrence M. The Commission contends that we do not have jurisdiction over this case because (1) Appellants did not properly intervene and (2) the district court's denial of Appellants' motion was not a final. The district court's decision is therefore reversed. I. BACKGROUND Appellants are the focus of an ongoing FEC investigation concerning alleged violations of the Federal Election Cam paign Act (
	OPINION/ORDER (2) her eleventh claim for relief against Defendant Multnomah County for retaliation under Oregon Revised Statutes § 659.030A(1)(f).2 The remaining Defendants are Sheriff Noelle and Multnomah County. Stat. § 659.030 was renumbered § 659A.030 in 2001. 1 10276 POOL v. VANRHEEN We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm. Pool was in charge of records. Her direct and only supervisor was Sheriff Noelle. Pool was the only racial minority. Sheriff Noelle indicated that he selected Commanders
	OPINION/ORDER Charged along with more than a dozen other individuals in a 26 count indictment that was eventually redacted at trial to seven counts. To be followed by a three year term of supervised release. consolidated for sentencing before Judge Laken's offenses were Pauley. (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support their convictions on (a) the RICO conspiracy count. Laken and Black were indicted and tried on charges that they. Those coconspirators were to use part of the illegally gained moneys to fund their bribery payments to the union officials. The Pension Fund Fraud/Kickbacks Trial Laken and Black were tried in a 15 week trial in 2001 2002. Prior to its conclusion he entered into a plea agreement with the government. principal government witness was Jeffrey Pokross. Until he was arrested in 1996 and agreed to cooperate with the government. Pokross was a principal in DMN Capital Investments. The affairs of DMN Capital were overseen by Robert Lino. With Pokross's cooperation many conversations were recorded.
	OPINION/ORDER Have each petitioned for rehearing. All but MMTC seek rehearing of the court's decision not to sever Option B from the Commis sion's EEO rule after holding that only that aspect of the challenged rule was unconstitutional. Only the UCC and the Intervenors seek rehearing of the court's underlying conclusion that Option B is unconstitutional.* The only issue about which the various petitions raise any points that were not fully considered in our prior opinion is the severability of Option B. The dissent re peatedly claims the Commission's only goal is
	OPINION/ORDER Charged along with more than a dozen other individuals in a 26 count indictment that was eventually redacted at trial to seven counts. To be followed by a three year term of supervised release. consolidated for sentencing before Judge Laken's offenses were Pauley. (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support their convictions on (a) the RICO conspiracy count. Laken and Black were indicted and tried on charges that they. Those coconspirators were to use part of the illegally gained moneys to fund their bribery payments to the union officials. The Pension Fund Fraud/Kickbacks Trial Laken and Black were tried in a 15 week trial in 2001 2002. Prior to its conclusion he entered into a plea agreement with the government. principal government witness was Jeffrey Pokross. Until he was arrested in 1996 and agreed to cooperate with the government. Pokross was a principal in DMN Capital Investments. The affairs of DMN Capital were overseen by Robert Lino. With Pokross's cooperation many conversations were recorded.
	NOVOSTEEL SA V. U.S. Argued for plaintiff appellant.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Plaintiff appellant Delores Armour claims that her First Amendment rights were violated when she was fired from her position as secretary to defendant appellee Bea Schulte. Armour contends that she was terminated because of her political beliefs. On the ground that the County and Schulte had satisfied the burden of establishing that political affiliation was an appropriate requirement for the secretarial position. That appellant had failed to adduce sufficient evidence to enable a fact finder to infer that her termination was politically motivated i.e. Schulte decided to terminate her based on the perception that Armour was supporting a candidate other than the one backed by Schulte in a campaign for a local judgeship. Armour was one of a number of people working on Schulte's campaign. The parties agree that in early February Schulte learned of Armour's contact with Askar who was running against the Democratic candidate supported by Schulte and the local party establishment and questioned Armour about her involvement with Askar's campaign.
	OPINION/ORDER Were on the brief. Were on the brief. PARKS 6777 claims are numerous and the issues presented are even more numerous. The facts are set out in some detail. Were missing and possibly stolen. After
	OPINION/ORDER Spitzer and Kate Martin were on the brief for amici curiae Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. With him on the brief were Wilma A. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. I The plaintiffs in this case are Mohamed Al Fayed and Punch Limited. The French government investigated the accident and concluded that it was caused by Paul's intoxication and excessive speed. Plaintiffs allege that the National Security Agency (NSA) may have secretly recorded Princess Diana's telephone con versations. Al Fayed was the victim of an attempted fraud by Oswald LeWinter. Who tried to sell Al Fayed fabricated documents indicating that MI6 was involved in the automobile crash. He was arrest ed and incarcerated by Austrian authorities. They further contend that the CIA and FBI may have been involved in efforts to prevent those prosecutions. Plaintiffs 1 The ten were: the CIA. One of the agencies has been voluntarily dismissed from the case and five more have completed processing plaintiffs' underlying document requests.
	01-6444 -- TRENTADUE V. U.S. -- 10/25/2004 They primarily contend that the district court committed clear error in finding Trentadue committed suicide in his prison cell and in finding that federal officials did not engage in the intentional destruction of evidence. The principal issues presented by the government's appeal are (1) whether plaintiffs have exhausted the FTCA's notice requirements. (3) whether plaintiffs have satisfied the elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress under Oklahoma law. Trentadue was arrested in California in June 1995 for driving while intoxicated. He was arrested for these parole violations and held in local jails for the next few weeks. On August 18. Trentadue was placed in the Parole Violator's Unit of the prison where he made several calls to family members and assured them he would not be at the FTC long. He was pronounced dead a few minutes later. The circumstances surrounding Trentadue's death raise troubling questions. Trentadue's family maintains Trentadue was murdered by prison guards or another inmate.
	MACUBA V. DEBOER (10/29/1999, NO. 98-2651) They contended that they were immune from suit under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity. We reverse. I. Joseph Macuba was. Part of his job was to investigate complaints against builders and the failure of his co workers to enforce county building codes. Questioned DeBoer about the situation. This was not the first time that an investigation conducted by Macuba resulted in inquiries from the media. He was elected in November. Matthew sent an anonymous letter criticizing Macuba to the Board of Commissioners.
	OPINION/ORDER American Depositary Receipts (
	OPINION/ORDER The district court1 granted summary judgment to the defendants on all claims except for McClure's breach of contract claim which was tried to a jury. Judgments were entered in favor of the defendants. American Family) are affiliated Wisconsin corporations operating under common management. Dale Mathwich are officers of American Family. American Family is licensed to sell insurance in Minnesota. American Family markets its insurance through exclusive agents whose relationships with it are governed by written contracts which state that they supersede all prior agreements.2 Its exclusive agents are required to sell all types of insurance offered by American Family. McClure and Kemp were both exclusive agents under contract with American Family. No modification of its terms may be made unless that modification is agreed to in writing by the Agent and the Company.
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs was Jan Witold Baran. David Kolker. With him on the brief were Lawrence M. The Commission contends that we do not have jurisdiction over this case because (1) Appellants did not properly intervene and (2) the district court's denial of Appellants' motion was not a final. The district court's decision is therefore reversed. I. BACKGROUND Appellants are the focus of an ongoing FEC investigation concerning alleged violations of the Federal Election Cam paign Act (". Its assertion is based on two separate premises. the FEC suggests that Appellants were not parties to the subpoena enforcement action and did not seek to intervene. See Fed. These decisions are not appealable because they did not ". That is. 2000). Both the district court and the FEC were aware of Appel lants' desire to intervene. The March 17 Motion was entered on the district court's docket sheet as a motion ".
	OPINION/ORDER This escrow order directed to Gemstar was predicated upon the district court's conclusion under the statute that these payments. Which were to be made during the course of a lawful investigation by the SEC of Gemstar involving possible violations of federal securities laws. Were
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Defendant seeks to have the jury's verdict set aside and judgment entered in his favor. The plaintiff was awarded a substantial verdict based on one of Hopkins' libelous statements. On the grounds that the jury did not find that Hopkins' other three statements were libelous. Was a
	OPINION/ORDER The case was originally assigned to Judge Donald J. Lee but was later reassigned to Judge Arthur J. This decision was based on Pennsylvania's
	LINDER DAVID V. NATL SECURITY AGENCY
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs were Peter E. With him on the brief were Roscoe C. Bruce were on the brief for amicus curiae United States Beet Sugar Associ ation in support of appellees. We think appellants have demonstrat ed standing and because the Department did not comply with the APA or the Food Security Act. Is about evenly divided between sugar cane and sugar beet production. Appellants are self described small . Which is particularly trouble some for sugar beet farmers. A farmer's bid is his asking price for that amount of destruc tion. The price is expressed in terms of a percentage of the three year average value of the crop yield for the acreage diverted. The average bid was approximately 84 percent and resulted in the distribution of about 277. Participants were prohibited from participating in future PIK programs if they increased their acreage planted with sugar beets over 2000 levels. It is not clear what caused the increase. PIK farm ers received more sugar through the program than they would have if they had produced sugar on the diverted acres.
	OPINION/ORDER 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
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs was Cornish F. With her on the brief were Kenneth L. Jr. were on the brief for appellee Christian Broadcasting Network. Which TA contends was inadequate. Case law of this Circuit by showing that withheld documents were exempt from FOIA's disclosure requirements. The closing agreement was reached in the same time period during which CBN secured taxexempt status going forward. The Internal Revenue Code sets forth a basic rule regarding public disclosure of documents pertaining to application for tax exempt status: [For organizations exempt under Section 501(c) or (d)] the application filed by the organization with respect to which the Secretary made his determination that such organization was entitled to exemption . . . . So long as the return information is not subject to disclosure under Section 6104. This Court 5 has already held that the fact that Section 6103 is a statute
	OPINION/ORDER The Matovskis are natives and citizens of Macedonia. The B 2 visitor status applies to aliens who have a residence in a foreign country that they have no intention of abandoning and who are temporarily visiting the United States for pleasure. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(B). After the Department of Labor earlier found there were insufficient qualified United States workers to perform the Nikolic work and the INS found Matovski was qualified for the position. Petitioners renewed their adjustment of status applications and argued that they were previously authorized to remain in the United States while pursuing their adjustment of status applications. The Immigration Judge found Petitioners inadmissible for failing to establish that immigrant visas were immediately available to them. The Immigration Judge found: (1) Petitioners were inadmissible because they willfully misrepresented a material fact to obtain an immigration benefit by filing two extension of status applications containing false information. (2) Petitioners were ineligible for adjustment of status as a matter of discretion.
	OPINION/ORDER Issue 3 In this case we are called upon to decide whether or not the official motto of the State of Ohio.
	OPINION/ORDER
	AMER MESSAGE CTRS V. FCC
	OPINION/ORDER The lyrics and video of Michael's newly released song Outside.1 The action was dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Was working with his partner in Will Rogers Park in Beverly Hills due to complaints of lewd acts taking place in the men's restroom. Is a well known pop singer and song writer. 1 6 RODRIGUEZ v. He was fined and placed on probation. Michael claimed that Rodriguez had induced him to engage in the lewd act for which he was arrested by first exposing himself to and masturbating2 in front of him.3 Rodriguez contends that these statements are slanderous per se under California Civil Code § 46 because they accuse him of committing the crime of engaging 2 While most of Michael's statements claimed that Rodriguez had
	OPINION/ORDER Were on brief. Buchanan were on brief. This is a case of first impression for this court as to the standards for awarding attorneys' fees against the United States for its initiation of criminal proceedings. The district court awarded fees on the grounds that the government's prosecution was
	OPINION/ORDER Because we find that the case is to be remanded for a new trial on the jury instruction issue. CSTs are responsible for the maintenance of both underground and suspended telephone cables. SWB then administered a manual dexterity test and a physical performance test (PPT) to those applicants who were successful on the written exam.2 The PPT had four subdivisions. 2) the arm We have. We have concluded. In view of the fact that the case is to be remanded for a new trial. He was especially concerned about the leg lift. Because Belk's legs are weakened from polio. He is unable to perform
	OPINION/ORDER Ernestine Carter Hughes contends that the defendants unlawfully subjected her to dangerous medical tests in 1945 when she was a child. The district court concluded that Hughes's 1998 action was barred by the statute of limitations. Vanderbilt University conducted a three month study to further understand how iron is absorbed in the human body. Which was funded by the Nutrition Foundation. Was one of the principal researchers. Most of whom were between the ages of seven and ten. Were given lemonade that had been laced with radioactive iron. She was eight years old and a student at the Caldwell elementary school. Was one of Darby's subjects.
	OPINION/ORDER Lost one leg and suffered a serious injury to the other when a load of steel sheets that he was unloading from a boxcar fell on him from the crane that was lifting the sheets out of the boxcar. Further ruling that if this was wrong the defendant was entitled to a new trial because the jury had been confused by irrelevant evidence and had ignored critical instructions. Is actually quite simple. There was no basis for the entry of judgment for the defendant. Built into the plant was a very old crane. They would have noticed. Was that when a boxcar was being unloaded underneath the section of the bridge to which the cab was attached. There was only a foot or two of clearance between the rim of the boxcar and the cab overhead. No. 04 2146 3 The renovation undertaken by Konecranes did not involve changing the physical structure that we have described. The most significant alteration was to substitute for the controls in the operator's cab a hand held remote control device with which the operator would operate the crane from ground level.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs were William E. With him on the brief were John H. Detroit News' decision to terminate his employment was motivated in part by Hydorn's protected union activity. That Detroit News failed to prove it would have fired him even in the absence of this activity. Senior Circuit Judge Edwards was in regular active service at the time of oral argument. * 3 251 N.L.R.B. 1083 (1980). That an employee's protected conduct was a motivating factor in the employer's decision. The burden of persuasion shifts
	OPINION/ORDER We hold that Smith is entitled to equitable tolling because the district court erroneously dismissed his earlier. I. Smith was convicted of first degree burglary and sentenced to 22 years in prison. His conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. Shortly after AEDPA was signed into law on April 24. While the state's motion to dismiss was pending. The district court held that Smith had not fairly presented this claim because the language quoted above was indecipherable. Smith explained that his difficulty in presenting his case was attributable to his lack of education and illiteracy. 2 Under AEDPA's one year grace period. This time on the ground that this final petition was barred by the statute of limitations. The district court held that this petition was untimely and dismissed it with prejudice. We granted a motion to expand the COA to include the issue of whether Smith was entitled to equitable tolling. Smith was entitled to statutory tolling from July 5. For reasons that are not clear from the record.
	OPINION/ORDER Line 3 the number
	OPINION/ORDER 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
	GOLD COAST PUBLICATIONS V. CORRIGAN This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Gold Coast Publications v. A newspaper publisher contends that the Ordinance is a facially invalid abridgment of the newspaper's rights of free speech and free press under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and comparable provisions of the Florida Constitution. The district court concluded that the Ordinance was facially valid except for three provisions that require the use of a particular make and model of newsrack or its </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200302/02-7055b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6B047236FA5A85F588256CE4005D93F2/$file/0156199.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: Competition is the mainspring of a capitalist economy. Setting industry standards and pooling market data are two examples of arrangements that often benefit consumers. Up to date information about properties on the market is a must. Long gone are the days when agents trawled the neighborhood on horseback in search of telltale </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200302/94-0002g.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/03a0329p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That the district court's dismissal of this claim was inappropriate. I. Plaintiff was employed by the Pauline Warfield Lewis Center ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200613058.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which have since been sealed following media reports about their contents. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200612967.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Concluding: (1) that Locke's negligence claim against her employer was barred by the exclusivity provisions of Florida's workers' compensation laws. She was working as a manager at SunTrust's Recker Highway bank branch in Winter Haven. Because the teller's window glass was bulletproof. 2002 date she was shot. SunTrust was aware that a teller at the same bank had been pistol whipped by a bank robber. Locke was told that SunTrust had hired a security guard and that the security guard would be in place at the bank branch. There was no security guard in place at the branch. The district court concluded that Locke's claim was barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Florida workers' compensation laws because her injuries were causally related to her employment as a bank manager. The parties do not dispute that Locke's Notice of Appeal was filed more than thirty days after the entry of the district court's dismissal order on April 10. Locke's Notice of Appeal was due on or before May 10. This is sometimes known as the workers' compensation exclusivity bar. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/07/97-5063.htm">97-5063 -- LANCASTER V. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 5 (OKLA.) -- 07/28/1998<BR></A><BR> Defendants were awarded $3. 1291 and affirm. <p align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200303/02-5251a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/02-5342a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0316p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A petition for a writ of habeas corpus was filed on Harries's behalf in 1984. Habeas proceedings were stayed while Harries pursued postconviction relief in Tennessee state courts. That standard entitles Harries to have the federal habeas court </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200606/04-1368a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Deborah J. With him on the briefs were Bennett L. With him on the brief were Thomas O. With him on the brief were Richard M. Edward Shakin were on the brief of ILEC Intervenors in support of respondent. Although this relay is imperceptible to the caller. How the call is paid for matters a great deal to the participating telecommunications carriers. The `originating' carrier A is ordinarily required to compensate the `terminating' carrier B for the use of carrier B's facilities. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511951.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: This is an appeal by the trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Ricky Bracewell from an order of the district court excluding from the estate a payment Bracewell received under the Agricultural Assistance Act of 2003 for crop losses he had sustained. The appeal turns on the issue of whether a crop disaster payment is property of the debtor's estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1) or (a)(6) if the losses occurred before the bankruptcy filing or conversion date but the legislation authorizing the payment came afterwards. The bankruptcy court ruled that the payments were property of the estate under § 541(a)(1) but not under (a)(6). The district court ruled that the payment was not property of the bankruptcy estate under either subsection of § 541. This is the trustee's appeal from that ruling. I. The facts have been stipulated throughout these proceedings. He was unable to repay the debts he had incurred to produce the crops. While Bracewell's bankruptcy petition was pending. The Emergency Farmer and Rancher Assistance Act of 2002 was introduced in the House of Representatives. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3BC4CBC4E3F50F418825715600022D4D/$file/0457037d.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The school authorities have offered no lawful justification for banning Harper's t shirt and the district court should therefore have enjoined them from doing so pending the outcome of this case. The district court should have enjoined the policy as well. Which is governed by Hazelwood School District v. It is governed by Bethel School District No. 403 v. All other speech falls into the third category and is governed by Tinker v. Harper's t shirt was clearly not school sponsored. It was a closer question whether Harper's t shirt involved plainly offensive speech. Explaining that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200415920.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Miranda was convicted by a jury of the crimes of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine. Miranda contended that the evidence presented by the Government was insufficient to demonstrate that he was a member of the alleged conspiracy. We reverse the judgment of acquittal because we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that Mr. Miranda was a member of the 2 conspiracy. That he is guilty of the possession crimes that were committed in furtherance of the conspiracy. Cuevas </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Feb2004/024581np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> On behalf of themselves and their clients who are specifically identified and/or whose claims are affected by Pretrial Order No. 2677. Circuit Judge This appeal is taken from the District Court's Pretrial Order (PTO) No. 2677 by two law firms on behalf of class members who had previously settled their mass tort claims in the M DL 1203 Diet Drug litigation. Because we conclude that the District Court's extension of the deadlines was a permissible exercise of its discretion. We will affirm. I. We have previously set forth the basic facts in the Diet Drug litigation. Because this opinion is written only for the parties. It is those side effects that are the subject of the Diet Drug litigation at hand. The federal Diet Drug actions were consolidated for pretrial purposes in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania pursuant to MDL 1203 and. Notice to the class explained the nature of the injuries claimed by the plaintiffs and that diagnosis of those injuries (and therefore potential qualification for participation in the Settlement Agreement) was possible through an echocardiogram. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug2000/99-10389.opn.html">TRUJILLO V. CONOVER & CO. COMMUNICATIONS (8/11/2000, NO. 99-10389)<BR></A><BR> That case still is pending in a Bahamian court.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3920_023.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This was 42 months more than the high end of the advisory sentencing guidelines range of 63 78 months. He claims there was insufficient 2 No. 05 3920 evidence to convict him and that the chief judge made erroneous factual findings that led to an unreasonable sentence. The evidence against Orozco Vasquez on the drug count was plentiful and strong. We also have no difficulty concluding that Orozco Vasquez's above guidelines sentence is reasonable. The effort is misplaced. There is a difference between formal factual findings and judicial observations that explain conclusions about sentencing factors. Several Milwaukee police officers went to a duplex on the south side of the city acting on a tip that Orozco Vasquez wanted on an outstanding warrant for failing to report for a prior sentence was in the house. Fernando Campos Ruiz (who became a codefendant in this case) came out onto a porch off the upstairs unit and asked who was knocking. Officers outside shouted that items were being thrown from the upper unit. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></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-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-2998A.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ward was employed. They were subsequently tried and convicted for conspiring to rob a bank. Ward was not originally scheduled to work the morning shift. Her only co worker that morning was Shantel James. While James was sitting inside the bank's glass enclosed office and preparing for the start of business. Who was then wearing a bandana over his face and a black leather coat with the hood over his head. 000 and then returned to where the robber was located. Even though there was a dye packet right next to the money in the vault. Which would have exploded once it left the bank's premises. Which was kept in the vault. Came back to the office with Nos. 03 2998 & 03 2999 3 the correct videotape although there were other tapes she could have used. Ward and her husband Gregory were arrested for the robbery of the TCF Bank branch. The money in the kitchen was found inside a bag marked </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1D1A24888DBC433E88256D7C0077EDAF/$file/0156401.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defense attorney James Burdick argued that Lieberman's expert witness testimony played an important role in the jury's determination that Schmitz lacked specific intent and thus was not guilty of first degree murder. Lieberman submitted a handwritten estimate of specific times on March 23 and advised Fieger that she was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200310226.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Facts Morris is a media company that publishes print and electronic newspapers. PGA is the sponsor of a series of professional golf tournaments throughout North America known as the PGA Tour. RTSS is an elaborate electronic relay scoring system that relies on state of the art computer technology and equipment as well as dozens of trained workers and volunteers. 2 RTSS works as follows. The scores are then collected by other volunteers. The scores of all participating golfers are then processed at the remote production truck and transmitted to PGA's website. Which are scores that are transmitted electronically nearly contemporaneously to their actual occurrence on the golf course. The compiled scores are also transmitted to an on site media center where members of the media are able to access the scores. The same information is also transmitted to various electronic leaderboards located throughout the golf course. The 3 only source of compiled golf scores for all tournament players is RTSS. The only physical location at which to obtain compiled golf scores is the media center. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1495.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was on brief. Lewis was responsible for implementing and developing policy relating to music education. The Music Director was one of ten Senior Program Directors in the Department of Curriculum and Instructional Practices ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></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-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/01/032972P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Including § 1983 damage claims alleging that Bradford was constructively discharged in violation of his First Amendment free speech rights as a public employee. The ECIO is appointed by and serves at the will of the Governor. Bradford was appointed by Governor Huckabee in October 2001. He was the first person to hold the ECIO position. Bradford's 54 page complaint alleges that he was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/032127.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. RailWorks was formed in 1998 with the intent of becoming a national provider of integrated rail system services and products. RailWorks issued a press release announcing that its earnings for the year 2000 would be lower than expected and that the company was implementing a restructuring plan. The court concluded that these alleged misrepresentations and omissions were not material because RailWorks clearly disclosed to investors in </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200305/98-5340a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1692.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Wainwright & Wainwright were on brief. Smith & Cohen were on brief. Is this: Can a Massachusetts based court. Assert jurisdiction over a California resident who is alleged to have made a defamatory comment during an unsolicited telephone interview with a staff reporter for a Massachusetts newspaper? Alioto is an attorney practicing in California. Alioto is pressing a class action in the California courts against Ticketmaster Southern California. Is affiliated with Ticketmaster New York. Both Ticketmaster entities are engaged in the business of selling ducats to entertainment events. The record is equally barren of any showing that Alioto solicited the inquiry2 or that more than one call occurred. It is clear. Who was in California. At no point does the article refer by name to either T NY or T SC. 2Although there is a passing allusion in the record to a press release issued by Alioto regarding the lawsuit against T SC. There is no indication that he forwarded this release to Massachusetts or that it sparked the Globe's story. 3 gouging in New York and California. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/6d27b9b4187120e288256c39007a4509/$FILE/0015594.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 over Plaintiffs' timely appeal of the district court's judgment. Were each asked to analyze 623 pap smear slides. 1 Cytotechnologists are lab technicians that analyze pap smear slides. Which was not singled out by name. Said that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/05-1450b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Michael Deuel Sullivan and Robert B. On the briefs were Thomas Jones. With him on the brief were Thomas O. Shakin were on the brief for intervenors Qwest Corporation and the Verizon Companies in support of respondents. G. Harrington were on the brief for intervenor Cox Communications. That therefore the petition should have been </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/03/961348P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This action was brought by Donald Crittenden ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1918.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Allen & Snyder were on brief. Were on brief. We turn a deaf ear to these blandishments because close perscrutation of the record discloses that they are premature. This is no more than a run of the mine administrative subpoena enforcement proceeding which presents no legitimate opportunity to dwell on cosmic truths. Whom the area director believed might have an unusually high number of employees afflicted with multiple movement disorders. This exegesis is largely beside the point. The principal question before this court is much more mundane: did OSHA have the authority to issue the administrative subpoena? A A An administrative subpoena is not self executing and is therefore technically not a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-1505.html">HOCKERSON-HALBERSTADT, INC., V. AVIA GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC.,<BR></A><BR> With him on the brief was <u>Todd A. With him on the brief were <u>Linda E. Of counsel on the brief was <u>D. Having a heel that is bisected by a central groove creating two peripheral fins. In which 72 and 74 are the fins and 70 is the groove. </p> <p ALIGN= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/jan96/94-2254.html">NEW MEXICO CITIZENS FOR CLEAN AIR AND WATER V. ESPANOLA MERCANTILE CO.<BR></A><BR> We will reverse and remand. This is an action to enforce the Clean Water Act against defendant for unpermitted discharges and other violations at the Espanola Transit Mix Facility in Espanola. Plaintiff New Mexico Citizens for Clean Air and Water is an environmental group and plaintiff Pueblo of San Juan is an Indian tribe that owns the affected land. Not long after the suit was commenced. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. defendant prevailed on the other two. Defendant would carry out and pay the costs of the treatment plan that was attached. The consent decree further provided in pertinent part: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0381p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Interpret and intend to enforce Ohio Revised Code § 3501.35 would have the effect of abridging their First Amendment rights. They were denied access to a polling No. 04 4313 1 Nos. 04 4313 Beacon Journal Publishing Company. Page 2 place where early voting was held. Finding that Ohio and Summit County </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></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-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021587.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Because we agree with the district court that Plaintiffs have failed to allege facts sufficient to provide the necessary strong inference that the defendants acted with scienter. These services are generally provided under fixed price. Both of which are in Tennessee. The amount of waste that can be kept on site at the processing facilities is strictly regulated. Because its waste disposal contracts typically charge clients by the pound of waste processed while burial costs are incurred on a volumetric basis. Tracking the waste as it is processed and shipped to the burial sites is thus essential in order for Duratek to estimate costs and project future earnings. The press release explained that the restatement of financial results was necessary </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021520.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Because federal diversity jurisdiction is proper between the parties. Because the district court erred in reaching the constitutional issue of whether Hugger and Settle are required to meet the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan actual malice standard before deciding the state law issue of whether sufficient evidence was proffered to establish a claim of defamation. H.D. told her mother that Settle Although the district court held that TRINC was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/06-1140.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> In
	FREEMAN ENG ASSOC V. FCC
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Appellants are individuals who purchased shares of General Nutrition Companies. Were adversely affecting GNC's comparable store sales. This failure to disclose caused the price of GNC stock to be higher than it otherwise would have been. This decline in price was only temporary. The stock was trading at approximately $38.00 a share. 5 true all factual allegations in the complaint and will affirm the dismissal
	MOHAMED AL-FAYED AND PUNCH LIMITED V. CIA Spitzer and Kate Martin were on the brief for amici curiae Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Argued the cause for appellees.
	OPINION/ORDER Nathanson was indicted on eight felony counts arising from federal offenses committed in his service 16329 from 1986 to 1992 as a member of the California Coastal Commission. Karlton was set for February 10. A date that was postponed. The bribes were paid by identified real estate developers and by persons owning homes on the coast. 000 bribe was arranged with the help of Alan Robbins. Nathanson was sentenced to imprisonment for 4 years and 9 months. The first letter was from Nathanson's lawyer. Attorney Geoffrey Goodman and was dated May 31. That is. Was from Jerrold M. In this letter the same political figure was alleged by Nathanson to have sought favorable action 16330 from the Coastal Commission on behalf of friends and supporters. Nathanson also was reported to have agreed to a bribe. No action was taken on Nathanson's motion to reduce sentence. A motion that did not quality as a Rule 35 motion because it was not made by the government. Nathanson's motion was not docketed. Was placed in the clerk's safe.
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: This is a case in which we affirm the disbarment of an attorney. The motion charged that these violations occurred while Morrissey was on probation. Finding Those rules have been renumbered and slightly. Or using any false document making a false statement. 1 IN RE: MORRISSEY 3 that Morrissey had been adjudged to have violated the conditions of his probation by violating 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and condition no. 3 of the terms of his probation which required that he should
	TRUJILLO V. CONOVER & CO. COMMUNICATIONS (8/11/2000, NO. 99-10389) That case still is pending in a Bahamian court.
	OPINION/ORDER Line 9 the phrase
	UNITED STATES V. WILES 1996 Please be advised of the following correction to the captioned decision: The footnotes should have been renumbered starting on page one of each of the dissents. Copies of the corrected dissents are attached for your convenience. Which was reheard en banc. Miniscribe was a Colorado based manufacturer of computer hard disk drives. Schleibaum is the former chief financial officer and vice president of Miniscribe. Schleibaum was charged in a two count criminal indictment with making false statements to the government in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001. Wiles is the former chairman of the board and chief executive officer of Miniscribe. Wiles was charged in a three count criminal indictment with making false statements to the government in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001. We have consolidated our disposition of these appeals. Miniscribe was then a privately owned company manufacturing computer disk drives in the basement of its founder. Miniscribe was an overtly profitable. Whose common stock was traded on the NASDAQ.
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Because plaintiffs have failed to offer sufficient evidence to establish any genuine issues of material fact. Was held at the Hawksnest resort in the Town of Seven Devils. This meeting was held in part because prior Spring Thaw parties at another location had led to community complaints regarding the rowdy and drunken behavior of attendees. Town police attended the party where at least six kegs of beer and assorted canned beer was provided by plaintiffs for sale. The chief stated under oath that he requested the inspection because he had learned that Hawksnest did not have an occupancy rating and he was worried that if anything happened at a crowded New Year's party. The fire marshal did not find any code violations and the party was held as planned. Issued a press release complaining about the police officers' conduct at the Leonard and Kasey Cottom were originally plaintiffs in this action. The district court found that plaintiffs' substantive due process claim was best understood as an allegation that the Town police violated their Fourth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable searches during the Plaintiffs also claimed that the Town violated their equal protection rights and that there was an unlawful conspiracy to deprive plaintiffs of their constitutional rights.
	OPINION/ORDER Was on brief. Claiming that they were unable to complete the robbery. Carlos was shot in the head. After two more shots were fired. Horton was no longer working for Desir. Horton
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER The motions to dismiss were made by defendants appellees Kos Pharmaceuticals. (Kos) is a pharmaceutical company that develops and markets prescription drugs. The offering price was $42.75. 000 shares were sold in the secondary offering. Underwriter Defendants). 3 Kos's only prescription drug product that was publicly available at the time of the secondary offering was an extended release niacin preparation called Niaspan. Niaspan was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in July 1997. Uhl's report was premised on estimates2 of the numbers of new and refill prescriptions for Niaspan during the first eight weeks that Kos's sales force marketed Niaspan. Uhl's conclusions were based on the assumption (that he and many other pharmaceutical analysts apparently share) that the number of new prescriptions filled during the eighth week of a new prescription drug product's initial marketing is particularly predictive of the market success the product will enjoy. 000 new prescriptions of Niaspan during the eighth week were needed.
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Network's principal place of business is in San Francisco. Pearson's principal place of business is in New York.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Is amended. The last sentence in the first full paragraph on page 3589 is amended to read as follows: Similarly. Found that a fast food franchisor and its franchisees were a single entity. The franchisees were located too far apart to be effective competitors. The last sentence on page 3590 is amended to read as follows: Cases have required instead that the constituent entities be neither actual nor potential competitors. The petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc is DENIED. Circuit Judge: Competition is the mainspring of a capitalist economy. Setting industry standards and pooling market data are two examples of arrangements that often benefit consumers. Up to date information about properties on the market is a must. Long gone are the days when agents trawled the neighborhood on horseback in search of telltale
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER The jury determined that the contract between plaintiffs and International Equipment was contingent upon Cline's ability to obtain financing and that he was not at fault for failing to do so. The jury's award was inconsistent with its verdict. International Equipment contests the district court's grant of the Rule 59(e) motion and claims that the district court based its decision on the mistaken conclusion that Bavetta was not plaintiffs' agent. In determining whether a directed verdict was properly granted. Discard all countervailing evidence and deny the motion if there is any doubt as to the conclusions to be drawn from the whole evidence. Must have clothed the agent with the appearance of authority. 483 (Tenn. 1980) (apparent authority is what a principal permits an agent to assume or holds out the agent as having). Testified that he was aware that Bavetta was not an employee of Demand Stamping and that he had agreed to pay Bavetta a commission on the sale of the press to Demand Stamping. Our review of this and other testimony presented at trial convinces us that there is insufficient evidence to support a finding of agency because the testimony only demonstrates that Bavetta acted in a manner consistent with his own selfinterest.
	OPINION/ORDER We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. When those johns are arrested. We hope that the only visit people make to our jail is a virtual visit.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Phoenix Color Corporation is a manufacturer in the high resolution printing industry. The plates are then mounted onto a printing press to generate repeat impressions of the plated image. Such plates were prepared through the use of film. The court concluded that the jury would have to decide whether the problems with CTP 1. The court held that Phoenix Color did not violate the U.C.C.'s obligation of good faith and was not conspiring with the substitute supplier it eventually engaged. Holding that CTP 1 was not part of the installment contract and that the jury would have to decide whether the final two machines ordered by Phoenix Color (
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER California voters will be asked to cast a ballot on some of the most important issues facing the State. Forty four percent of the electorate will be forced to use a voting system so flawed that the Secretary of State has officially deemed it
	OPINION/ORDER Was Wolf Haldenstein's Work Gratuitous? . 3. Introduction and Overview This is another set of appeals arising out of the $3.2 billion settlement of the shareholders' securities class action brought against the Cendant Corporation. Appellants are three law firms who represented members of the victorious class of Cendant plaintiffs. These firms were not selected by the District Court to serve as lead counsel for the class and were not compensated out of the $55 million in fees ultimately awarded to the appointed lead counsel. That they are therefore entitled to compensation from the class's recovery. The PSLRA has While this was not the first appeal taken in this lengthy litigation. It was the first to address counsel fees. Will therefore be denominated Cendant I for convenience. 4 1 significantly altered the landscape of attorneys' fee awards in securities class actions. Is accorded the status of lead plaintiff and assigned the right to appoint and duty to monitor lead counsel for the class. In the instant appeal we extend the analysis of Cendant I to the fee applications of firms that were not designated as lead counsel.
	TIME WARNER ENTRTNMT V. FCC
	OPINION/ORDER Was on brief. Were on brief. The court also applied recent Federal and State Supreme Court decisions on homosexuality to hold that a statement identifying an individual as homosexual is not defamatory
	GOLD COAST PUBLICATIONS V. CORRIGAN This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Gold Coast Publications v. A newspaper publisher contends that the Ordinance is a facially invalid abridgment of the newspaper's rights of free speech and free press under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and comparable provisions of the Florida Constitution. The district court concluded that the Ordinance was facially valid except for three provisions that require the use of a particular make and model of newsrack or its </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19982651.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> They contended that they were immune from suit under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity. I. Joseph Macuba was. Part of his job was to investigate complaints against builders and the failure of his co workers to enforce county building codes. This was not the first time that an investigation conducted by Macuba resulted in inquiries from the media. He was elected in November. Matthew sent an anonymous letter criticizing Macuba to the Board of Commissioners.1 Appellant Michael Youseff was elected to the Board of County Commissioners in November 1992. 2 Youseff asked Spatz where he was obtaining the information for his stories. Spatz revealed that Macuba was one of his principle sources. Youseff wrote the county attorney that Macuba was responsible for some of Spatz's criticism of the county government. All four were administered separately. This would save resources and provide owners and contractors with </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19982651.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> They contended that they were immune from suit under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity. I. Joseph Macuba was. Part of his job was to investigate complaints against builders and the failure of his co workers * Honorable Myron H. This was not the first time that an investigation conducted by Macuba resulted in inquiries from the media. He was elected in November. Matthew sent an anonymous letter criticizing Macuba to the Board of Commissioners.1 Appellant Michael Youseff was elected to the Board of County Commissioners in November 1992. 2 Youseff asked Spatz where he was obtaining the information The letter is apparently not in the record. Neither the record nor the parties' briefs indicate the nature of the criticisms. 2 1 The record is unclear with respect to the date. 2 for his stories. Spatz revealed that Macuba was one of his principle sources. Youseff wrote the county attorney that Macuba was responsible for some of Spatz's criticism of the county government. All four were administered separately. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200310/94-0001i.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200310/94-0002l.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Dec1994/94a0919p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court found that the Republic of the Philippines was harassing witnesses who had testified against it in a suit it had brought in federal court in New Jersey. We will reverse. The district court determined that all but two of the counts against Westinghouse were subject to international arbitration. Most of the Republic's claims against Westinghouse were referred to arbitration under the Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce.[fn1] In the remaining two counts. Huge foreign loans were incurred to pay for the project. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0661n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendant Aventis S.A. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200401/94-0001m.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/97opinions/97-1553.html">HEIDELBERG HARRIS, INC. V. LOEBACH<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2002/99-11690.opn.html">OXFORD ASSET MGMT., LTD. V. JAHARIS (7/16/2002, NO. 99-11690)<BR></A><BR> (Kos) is a pharmaceutical company that develops and markets prescription drugs. The offering price was $42.75. 000 shares were sold in the secondary offering. 000 shares.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb1998/98a1793p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue on appeal is the continuing vitality of our opinion in International Bhd. of Elec. Monitors </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May2000/991613.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The defendants are the District. Detective Hahn were entitled to qualified immunity. She was a leader in a local chapter of a group known as Seeking Educational Equity and Diversity. That she felt it was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/06/03-3068.htm">03-3068 -- STAHL V. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF WYNANDOTTE COUNTY/KANSAS -- 06/10/2004<BR></A><BR> She was a supervisor in the County Police Department's Vice and Narcotics Unit. <p> In June 2000. According to the district court </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-4064.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> When it became apparent that the appeal was untimely. Appellee's motion to waive oral argument is granted. Appellant's motion for oral argument is denied. The case is ordered submitted on the briefs. (1) The BAP issued a show cause order and then dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Rule 8002(c) Ruling </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/67F77ED13FE54E3A88256CE700821978/$file/0156319.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Dyer and Jeanie owned a house together when they were married ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1094b.html">MD DC DE BCASTR ASSN V. FCC<BR></A><BR> Have each petitioned for rehearing.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200312/02-5224a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-3103.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The statue in question is entitled Holier Than Thou and depicts the head and upper torso of what appears to be a Roman Catholic bishop. Vacates the judgment of the district court as to those claims since subject matter jurisdiction is now lacking. BACKGROUND Washburn University is a municipal university in Topeka. The university is governed by a nine member Board of Regents. Which is responsible for appointing the university president. Depicts a Roman Catholic bishop with a contorted facial expression and a miter that some have interpreted as a stylized representation of a phallus. The bronze statue measures thirty seven inches high by twenty seven inches wide and is inscribed with the words. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200403/02-5266a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/67D236F33EAEBD9788256FBF00782F46/$file/0315872.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an interlocutory appeal brought by Defendants from a denial of a motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity. That those rights were not clearly established and Defendants have qualified immunity from suit. While mere acquiescence by the police to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19939345.REH.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BY THE C O U R T: This case is before the court on Plaintiff Appellant's petition for rehearing and on her motion to supplement the record or for a remand to do so. The motion to supplement the record or to remand is DENIED. Although we have inherent equitable power to supplement the record with information not reviewed by the district court. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-1952.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The action was brought in federal court on behalf of Abbott shareholders against Abbott's board of directors alleging that the directors breached their fiduciary duties and are liable under Illinois law for harm resulting from a consent decree which required Abbott to pay a $100 million civil fine to the FDA. An order vacating the panel opinion was issued on August 2. Is a diversified health care company that develops and markets pharmaceutical. These products are heavily regulated by the FDA and must be manufactured in accordance with the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19939345.MA2.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BY THE COURT: This case is before the court on Plaintiff Appellant's petition for rehearing and on her motion to supplement the record or for a remand to do so. The motion to supplement the record or to remand is DENIED. Although we have inherent equitable power to supplement the record with information not reviewed by the district court. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/97opinions/97-1234.html">COYLE'S V. CUOMO<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200402/94-0001q.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1E333D9A34F80E4888256B1600062201/$file/0170941.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Nathanson was indicted on eight felony counts arising from federal offenses committed in his service 16329 from 1986 to 1992 as a member of the California Coastal Commission. Karlton was set for February 10. A date that was postponed. The bribes were paid by identified real estate developers and by persons owning homes on the coast. 000 bribe was arranged with the help of Alan Robbins. Nathanson was sentenced to imprisonment for 4 years and 9 months. The first letter was from Nathanson's lawyer. Attorney Geoffrey Goodman and was dated May 31. That is. Was from Jerrold M. In this letter the same political figure was alleged by Nathanson to have sought favorable action 16330 from the Coastal Commission on behalf of friends and supporters. Nathanson also was reported to have agreed to a bribe. No action was taken on Nathanson's motion to reduce sentence. A motion that did not quality as a Rule 35 motion because it was not made by the government. Nathanson's motion was not docketed. Was placed in the clerk's safe. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2429.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Or document filed\ pursuant to this chapter or any rule or regulation\ thereunder . . . which statement was at the time and in\ the light of the circumstances under which it was made\ false or misleading with respect to any material fact. \ shall be liable to any person (not knowing that such\ statement was false or misleading) who. Shall have purchased or sold a security\ at a price which was affected by such statement. Unless the person sued\ shall prove that he acted in good faith and had no\ knowledge that such statement was false or misleading. .\ . .</span></p>\ <p style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-2333.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Cuprill</U> were on brief for appellant.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-5411a.html">SWEETLAND RODNEY V. WALTERS, GARY<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-2243.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> <U>Senior Circuit Judges</U>.</FONT></P> <BR WP= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1343.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue before us is whether this <hr> Clause precludes Plaintiff Rita Bastien's employment discrimination claim brought under the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (the CAA). We hold that suit is not barred because the claim does not question the conduct of official Senate legislative business by Senator Campbell or his aides. Damages are paid from funds appropriated into the OOC's Treasury account. She was transferred to the Senator's Colorado Springs office. Where she was a District Director. She was terminated. Plaintiff responded that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-6444.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Are granted in part. A revised opinion is attached. The petitions for rehearing en banc was transmitted to all of the judges of the court who are in regular active service as required by Fed. The petitions are denied. The principal issues presented by the government's appeal are (1) whether plaintiffs have exhausted the FTCA's notice requirements. (3) whether plaintiffs have satisfied the elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress under Oklahoma law. Trentadue was arrested in California in June 1995 for driving while intoxicated. He was arrested for these parole violations and held in local jails for the next few weeks. Trentadue was placed in the Parole Violator's Unit of the prison where he made several calls to family members and assured them he would not be at the FTC long. He was pronounced dead a few minutes later. <hr> The circumstances surrounding Trentadue's death raise troubling questions. Trentadue's family maintains Trentadue was murdered by prison guards or another inmate. They also allege prison officials were deliberately indifferent to Trentadue's medical needs as guards waited several minutes to open the cell door and cut Trentadue's noose. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200401/03-7015b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200312/94-0001l.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar1995/95a0985p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We hold that no payment is due for time spent in public relations efforts. We will disallow those fees as well as those for duplicative work. Other claims that were not supported by evidence at a hearing on fees or that were improperly inflated because the tasks performed were easily delegable to personnel with substantially lower hourly rates. Will also be denied. A consent decree was entered. It was not long before the controversy erupted again. The plaintiff class filed a motion to have the court hold the City of Philadelphia and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in contempt for failing to adhere to the terms of the consent decree. 000 and that matter is not at issue. An award of fees and expenses in this case is permissible under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and under the court's inherent power to reimburse a party for outlays incurred in securing an adjudication of contempt. The formula for awarding fees in the contempt context is usually the more generous. The innocent party is entitled to be made whole for the losses it incurs as the result of the contemnors' violations. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/09/03-2187.htm">03-2187 -- VALDEZ V. STATE OF NEW MEXICO -- 09/02/2004<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff appellant G. Have engaged in a long standing rivalry. 1. <p> This court will uphold a district court's dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/10/00-5007.htm">00-5007 -- DUNLOP TIRE CORP. V. I.M.E. OF MIAMI INC. -- 10/06/2000<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Dunlop Tire Corporation appeals from an order of the district court denying its motion for a new trial. The contracted delivery date was June 23. I.M.E. notified Dunlop it was anticipating delays in the delivery of necessary parts. Dunlop obtained possession of the press and hired another company to complete the project. <p> Dunlop then commenced this action seeking the costs it incurred to have the job completed. I.M.E. counterclaimed for the work it had completed but for which it was not paid. The case was tried to a jury. The jury had to determine that Dunlop was the sole cause of I.M.E.'s failure to complete the contract on time. Dunlop maintains the evidence shows that it was not responsible for I.M.E.'s delay. <p> We review the trial court's denial of a motion for a new trial on the ground that the jury's verdict is against the weight of the evidence for </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6D27B9B4187120E288256C39007A4509/$file/0015594.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 over Plaintiffs' timely appeal of the district court's judgment. Were each asked to analyze 623 pap smear slides. 1 Cytotechnologists are lab technicians that analyze pap smear slides. Which was not singled out by name. Said that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200412/94-0001v.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/11/002807P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was sentenced to death. His Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15 post conviction motion was denied after an evidentiary hearing. His appeal from that denial was consolidated with his direct appeal in the Missouri Supreme Court. Before us now are the twenty one issues on which the District Court granted a COA. We discuss the claims by categories we have chosen. Initially we will restate briefly the scope of our review since AEDPA. I. Standard of Review The relief Kinder seeks will not be granted on any claim </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></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-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTQ4MTItY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-4812-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Dow Jones appeals also from the denial of its motion for a preliminary injunction.2 Each plaintiff is the originator of a widely known index. Dow Jones is the creator of the Dow Jones Industrial Average ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTQ4MTItY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/05-4812-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Dow Jones appeals also from the denial of its motion for a preliminary injunction.2 Each plaintiff is the originator of a widely known index. Dow Jones is the creator of the Dow Jones Industrial Average ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlMb3JkZXIucGRm/00-9159Lorder.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. Held that those limits were supported by a compelling interest. The full court should have reheard this case in banc. The panel unanimously upheld the district court's determination that the Vermont statute's limitation on out of state contributions was unconstitutional. The panel was divided. Would have upheld the district court's determination that campaign expenditure limits are unconstitutional under Buckley v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200411/03-5241a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlMb3JkZXIucGRm/00-9159Lorder.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. Held that those limits were supported by a compelling interest. The full court should have reheard this case in banc. The panel unanimously upheld the district court's determination that the Vermont statute's limitation on out of state contributions was unconstitutional. The panel was divided. Would have upheld the district court's determination that campaign expenditure limits are unconstitutional under Buckley v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlMb3JkZXIucGRm/00-9159Lorder.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. Held that those limits were supported by a compelling interest. The full court should have reheard this case in banc. The panel unanimously upheld the district court's determination that the Vermont statute's limitation on out of state contributions was unconstitutional. The panel was divided. Would have upheld the district court's determination that campaign expenditure limits are unconstitutional under Buckley v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199812/98-5105a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Amber Wong Hsu. With him on the brief were Loretta C. An organization is not operated exclusively for exempt purposes if it is an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/07/002597P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He argues that the district court erred in sentencing because there was no evidence to support adjustments for his role in the offense and for his knowledge that money he received was proceeds of a specified unlawful activity and because the court failed to group the monetary transaction count with the fraud counts. Bubalo was president of the company and Wilcox was the director of marketing at the O Jay orange juice manufacturing plant located in Lindstrom. Hetherington indicated that he was interested in becoming a board member. O Jay was on shaky financial ground. The company had no assets and was producing no revenue. The press release indicated that O Jay was a diversified holding company with interests in juice production and wholesale tire distribution. An O Jay shareholders' meeting was called for the end of March 1993. One purpose of the meeting was to change the company's name to Omni International Trading. The other board members were unanimously opposed to the proposal. He stated that O Jay was going to do the shipping itself: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlfMm5kIEFtZW5kZWQucGRm/00-9159_2nd%20Amended.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed on February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Judges Straub and Pooler are filing a concurring opinion. Judges Sack and Katzmann are filing a concurring opinion. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. In light of the opinions that are being filed dissenting from this view. Is not whether the opinion for the panel majority or the dissent was right. Is indeed thorough and forceful. Assuming that it is as sound as the dissenters say that it is. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlfTF9vcmRlci5wZGY=/00-9159_L_order.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. Held that those limits were supported by a compelling interest. The full court should have reheard this case in banc. The panel unanimously upheld the district court's determination that the Vermont statute's limitation on out of state contributions was unconstitutional. The panel was divided. Would have upheld the district court's determination that campaign expenditure limits are unconstitutional under Buckley v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-5171a.html">BROWN & WILLIAMSON V. WAXMAN HENRY A.<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/94opinions/94-5124.html">HENKE V. U.S.<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2705.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellants Hon. Navas D'Acosta</SPAN> were on brief for appellants David Noriega Rodrí. <SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-2286_020.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> His wife and daughter have filed claims that depend on his. Musabelliu contends that he was persecuted (and remains at risk of persecution) because of his political opinions. While Serbian forces were removing ethnic Albanians from Kosovo and soldiers under his command were posted at the border. Musabelliu soon was promoted to general. Hajdaraga was removed from the defense portfolio on July 7. (He is not in office today. A new cabinet was formed that September with Sali Berisha of the Democratic Party as Prime Minister.). Musabelliu suspects that Hajdaraga (though out of office) had a hand in his dismissal (which the military services justified on the ground that 30 years is enough). Musabelliu likewise suspects that Hajdaraga was behind an incident during January 2001: two persons fired at a military convoy in which Musabelliu was riding. He was shot in the arm during April 2001 while returning from a visit to the prosecutor's office and maintains that all those who have opposed Hajdaraga must flee Albania if they are to remain safe. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/12/97-1337.htm">97-1337 -- GAGAN V. SOLANO -- 12/11/1997<BR></A><BR> We are mindful that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/053329p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The question presented in this appeal is whether Delaware's Freedom of Information Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1053OPN.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Powers</SPAN> was on brief for appellees.</SPAN></P> <BR WP= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200406/03-7047a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0133n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The plaintiffs argue that: 1) they were discharged in retaliation for exercising their First Amendment rights. 2) the Mentor police rules are an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech. Baker were police officers for the City of Mentor and active officers in the police union. Amiott's decision to recommend the discharge of the officers was based. Summary judgment is appropriate when </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june98/96-9249.man.html">ELAN PHARM. RESEARCH CORP. V. EMPLOYERS INS. OF WAUSAU (6/26/1998, NO. 96-9249)<BR></A><BR> Plc ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Nov1997/97a1741p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> District Judge: This case raises the question whether and in what circumstances a corporation and its officers have an obligation to investors to update. Plaintiffs in this securities fraud action are purchasers of stock in The Quaker Oats Company ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0023n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who are also white. Robb mentioned that there was also a black cat that had disappeared. He told Campbell that the black cat was his </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2BA74308F4A4A6B0882573130055EBFC/$file/0517027.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on the brief. Circuit Judge: We are asked. Whether the Anti terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act is unconstitutional. Numerous news reports were written on the crime. Crater and Robinson were tried for robbery. Robinson was convicted on all counts. After learning that Crater was reluctant to accept this deal. Finding no evidence that the state judge harbored </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961650.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lines 5 6 the sentence is corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/96DF119332A1DE9B88256E5A00707BF5/$file/9956682.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because certain of the prosecutors' acts were not done in their role as advocates. They are not shielded by absolute immunity. Milstein is a criminal defense attorney. Who was tried for two counts of homicide. Millward was acquitted of one count. A defense witness in the Millward trial who was then serving a California penal sentence. Mischaracterize the `evidence' against plaintiff during grand jury proceedings where said defendants . . . posed as `advisors' when in reality [they] were complaining witnesses. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0768117AF3AA6FDE88256E5A00707B75/$file/9830149.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: It was. What this means in practical terms is that. As the actions of one sovereign have encroached on the prerogatives of the other. Because the beneficiaries of these competing sovereignties are the citizens of the United States. The general government will at times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments. These will have the same disposition towards the general government. . . . If [the people's] rights are invaded by either. We have grown accustomed to relying on the federal government to protect our liberties against the excesses of state law enforcement. While state prosecutions of federal officers are less common. If federal agents are to perform their duties vigorously. The officers were armed but wore no visible law enforcement identification. They were still on the property at about 10:20 a.m. When they were detected by a party consisting of Kevin Harris. Samuel was shot twice. If the very first shot that was fired was Harris' mortal wound to Deputy Marshal Degan. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/01/032590P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Randy Anderson appeals the District Court's1 denial of his post conviction motion claiming that he received ineffective assistance of counsel while his case was on direct appeal. Anderson asserts that his appellate counsel should have challenged the validity of Anderson's guilty plea on the ground that Anderson was misinformed about the statutory mandatory minimum and maximum sentences applicable to his crime. United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. 1 Anderson's case was on direct appeal. The actual sentencing range applicable to Anderson's crime was lower than what Anderson understood it to be at the time of his guilty plea. Anderson and several co defendants were indicted for violating federal laws governing the possession and distribution of narcotics. Anderson was informed. This sentence range was predicated on the minimum and maximum sentences set forth in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A). Found that the errors committed by the District Court were harmless. Anderson argues that his counsel on direct appeal was ineffective because he failed to challenge the validity of Anderson's guilty plea on the ground that Anderson 2 could not have voluntarily and knowingly entered the plea. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200406/03-5019a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Nov1997/97a1741p.htm">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> District Judge: <br wp= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200305/02-5154a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/06/062368P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The facts are as follows. Captain Davison actively and publicly opposed the Plan and asserts that she repeatedly was denied promotion to the position of Arson Investigator in retaliation for her outspoken and public opposition. Kathy and [her son] were at a neighborhood meeting. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/apr96/94-6318.wpd.html">SHINAULT V. CLEVELAND CTY. BD. OF CTY. COMMISSIONERS<BR></A><BR> After Jerry Shinault was dismissed from his position as Cleveland County District 2 road foreman. We find that we do not have jurisdiction over Skinner's interlocutory appeal of the denial of qualified immunity. We are without jurisdiction to review any of the other claims. The two have not been friends since that time. Skinner was aware of this investigation. Shinault admitted that he was aware that county employees had worked on Bruesch's driveway and that he had been present during at least part of the project. A charge of which Shinault was later acquitted. The press releases were actually an underhanded attempt by the County Commissioners to discredit a past. Shinault claims that the equipment used to pave Bruesch's driveway was on loan to the school district. That the oil and chips were the property of the school district. That the paving was done at the direction of a school district employee. Shinault argues that his dismissal was the result of something rotten in Cleveland County. Claims in the alternative that if we hold that we have such jurisdiction. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0178a-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petitioner Robert Carl Foley was convicted of murder in Kentucky and sentenced to death. Were gathered at the Foley home when Foley returned from a car auction with his friend Danny Joe Bryant. Who was intoxicated and belligerent. You caused me to have to kill my partner. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Dec2002a/021611.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> It is not disputed that hexavalent chromium. Which is widely used in various industries and which has been classified as a carcinogen. Can have a deleterious effect on worker health. OSHA agreed that there was clear evidence that exposure to hexavalent chromium at the consensus level can result in excess risk of lung cancer and other chromium related illnesses. Announced that it was initiating a rulemaking that it expected would conclude in 1995. This matter was before us once before. For we concluded that the facts did not yet </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0444n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Alleging they were retaliated against for exercising First Amendment rights. Plaintiffs contend that the district court erred in its analysis of their retaliation claim and also argue that the edict is facially unconstitutional. We conclude that this case is now moot. The district court's opinion is VACATED. BACKGROUND The Business Journal is a bimonthly newspaper of general circulation that regularly publishes articles covering the Youngstown city government. McKelvey was the mayor for the city of Youngstown Ohio until his term ended at the end of the 2005 calendar year. The newspaper reported that it was likely it would not go through due to misguided business judgment. Public Records As Mayor of the City of Youngstown I have always recognized that Ohio's Public Records Act requires the City of Youngstown to make available all public records to any person. 1998) I have 3 always expected 100% compliance with Ohio's Public Records Act. I have always required my employees to adhere to my policy and philosophy that public records are the people's records. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/09/00-6081.htm">00-6081 -- CITY OF PHILADELPHIA V. FLEMING CO. INC. -- 09/07/2001<BR></A><BR> 78u 4(b)(1)(2). <p> This court has not yet ruled on what is required to plead scienter in a securities fraud case that falls under the PSLRA. We find that they have not pled facts giving rise to a strong inference that Defendants intentionally or recklessly failed to disclose the pending litigation in a manner that would give rise to liability for securities fraud. Because we find that Plaintiffs have not sufficiently pled a primary violation of the securities laws. Inc. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216215.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> It was alleged. Consisted of First Union and its analyst trying to obtain investment banking business from Ask Jeeves at the same time that they were supposed to be providing unbiased analysis on the company and its stock. This undisclosed conflict caused the analyst to tout the stock so that First Union would be looked upon favorably when Ask Jeeves decided who was going to get its investment banking business. Arguing in part that the securities fraud claim was timebarred and that the investors failed to sufficiently allege loss causation. Concluding that the investors who had purchased the stock at prices ranging from $78 to $134 per share were on inquiry notice of securities fraud when the stock dropped to $24 per share. We conclude that the complaint was not time barred on its face. Which are set out below. We will take judicial notice. Those prices are not subject to reasonable dispute. Are a proper subject for judicial notice. All references are to the per share closing prices of Ask Jeeves stock. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216135.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are compelled to agree with Alabama and must decline the ACLU's invitation. I. BACKGROUND Because the various user appellees and vendor appellees are all represented by the ACLU. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDA1LTU5NTRfc28ucGRm/05-5954_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> IJ A79 399 906 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER THIS SUMMARY ORDER WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REPORTER AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY TO THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT. It is hereby ORDERED. That the petition for review is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The adverse credibility determination is unsustainable. Jean Baptiste claimed that he was attacked in December 1998 after reporting on an opposition party press conference. That Lavalas members continued to threaten him because he worked for a radio station that 2 was perceived as affiliated with the opposition. The adverse credibility finding was based almost entirely on the government's submission of a fax from the Haitian Embassy. Containing the claims that Jean Baptiste was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/08/972969P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court's finding that a document inadvertently disclosed to Unisys during discovery was privileged and had to be returned. We affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment and finding that the inadvertently disclosed document was privileged. When Gundacker was forty two years old. Laying off Gundacker would have the least impact. Stating that the people on layoff were critical & shouldn't be let go. Upshot was. He was relieved of his mgm't responsibilities during week of Nov. 15 & resisted the acceptance until meeting in Dec. Soon after he was laid off. They claimed that the document was privileged attorney work product and asked that Nathan not use it. The magistrate determined that the document was privileged as attorney work product. Despite the fact that the separate qui tam action against Unisys was sealed entirely. While Gundacker was working at Unisys. He took several cartons of internal company documents and retained several other documents that were given to him in the 3 course of his employment. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0461n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jeffrey Glenn Galloway was charged on February 9. Galloway pleaded not guilty and was tried. He was convicted by a jury of all charges in November 2000. He argued that his lawyer's cross examination of Kirsch at trial about her prior written statement was No. 05 5003 USA v. The record shows that Galloway was the instigator and main actor in the importation: he hired Kirsch to help him smuggle the drugs and instructed her throughout the process. The evidence is convincing that he organized the trip. The majority of the panel that considered Galloway's direct appeal concluded that the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-5167.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We limited the applicability of the doctrine by holding that it applies only if </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-60906.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Inc. is DENIED. The court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * No. 02 60906 2Bivins' motion for leave to file supplemental record excerpts is DENIED. 546 (5th Cir. 1989). She argues that compliance was not necessary and that the information sought was not relevant to the issue of damages. The sanction was warranted due to Bivins' willful and contumacious conduct that impeded the efficient and orderly disposition of the case. See No. 02 60906 3The magistrate judge's order for Bivins to execute a medical privilege waiver is not directly appealable to this court because the parties did not consent to proceed before the magistrate judge. The appeal is F.2d 308. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-2002.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This opinion limns the basis for our ruling.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1995/95a1097p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Are equally applicable. I. Facts and Procedural History Koreh was born on September 4. An area that moved between Romania and Hungary but which was part of Hungary in 1940. As did the district court we rely only on facts that the parties do not dispute.[fn1] Because the relevant facts are set forth in detail in the district court's comprehensive published opinion. Hungary was the site of virulent anti Semitism during the late 1930s and early 1940s. This legislation was followed in 1939 by a second law that attempted to define </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200702/05-5142a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> O:\Slip\WP\2006\05 5142 Boyd8a.odl.wpd
	OPINION/ORDER As to Petitioner Max Alexander Soffar's claims that (1) he did not have effective assistance of counsel in the guilt phase proceedings. (2) his right to counsel was violated by police interrogation regarding an extraneous offense after he had been charged with capital murder and had requested and received appointed counsel. When that interrogation was later used to obtain a death penalty at the penalty phase. This current opinion will be sometimes referred to herein as Soffar III. Soffar's conviction was based indispensably on the statements taken from him by police after three days of interrogation and without an attorney present. The single known eyewitness was neither contacted by defense counsel nor called to testify. Which could have been controverted by that uncalled eyewitness. There was no physical evidence. We address the State's argument that Soffar's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was neither properly 2 exhausted in his state habeas petition nor properly raised in his federal habeas application.
	OPINION/ORDER All issues in this case have been decided save the issue certified herein. LYNCH proceedings are stayed pending final action by the California Supreme Court. CAPTION AND COUNSEL The caption of this case is as follows: READYLINK HEALTHCARE. B. The names and addresses of counsel are: For Readylink Healthcare and Barry Treash: Leo A. There is no controlling precedent answering the certified question. Our phrasing of the question should not restrict the Court's conPlaintiffs Appellants should be designated Petitioners in the event that certification is granted. 1 READYLINK HEALTHCARE v. The question of law to be decided is: Does the California Supreme Court's decision in Gates v. Is the speech of a non media defendant with a commercial interest in or malicious motive for publishing facts entitled to less protection under the First Amendment than that of a media defendant? The only potentially viable claim is Appellants' claim for invasion of privacy. Readylink Healthcare is a licensed healthcare service provider.
	OPINION/ORDER The Black Hills Institute of Geological Research (the Institute). success story and The was Institute's the activities of the focused a on the collection. Among the fossils seized were crinoid fossils.
	OPINION/ORDER He was not in the affected classification. Ulrich received notice that he was being investigated by the hospital for professional incompetence. The hospital refused to accept his recission of resignation and filed an adverse action report against him that leaves the impression that he resigned because he was guilty of the charges brought against him. Ulrich did not have a property right in the position from which he resigned. (2) his protest of layoffs was protected speech under the First Amendment. (3) he set forth sufficient facts demonstrating that allegedly defamatory statements were made in the course of a decision not to rehire him for purposes of establishing a liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment and (4) further proceedings are warranted on whether Dr. His own higher pay classification was not affected. Objecting that they were
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Baer Gallery is owned by artist Dean Baer and exists to promote his artwork. Baer was inspired to paint a rendering of the U.S. flag (the Image). To ensure that the Image was used for a good cause. The Agreement provided that Baer Gallery
	OPINION/ORDER Allen & Snyder were on brief. Cohen and Goldenberg & Muri were on brief. Retired Rhode Island legislators or their beneficiaries became eligible to receive annual pension benefits that were as much as sixty times greater than the legislators' annual pre retirement salaries. The pensioners whose benefits were thereby reduced brought suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 to foreclose any withholding of benefits. While the suit was pending. The pensioners then continued their suit in order to seek interest on the benefits for the time that they were withheld. I Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. The Rhode Island retirement system is a defined benefit plan. The retirement system is administered by a retirement board (
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Is corrected as follows: On page 26. Was on brief. We believe that Cronic is not nearly so wide ranging as the district court assumed. Petitioner is at liberty. EXHAUSTION OF REMEDIES The Commonwealth is the real party in interest in these proceedings. We treat the case as if it were the named respondent. We are not persuaded. Both the federal and state courts are entrusted with the protection of constitutional rights. A federal court will ordinarily defer action on a cause properly within its jurisdiction until the courts of another sovereign with concurrent powers. Have had an opportunity to pass upon the matter. The test is substantive: was the claim presented in such a way as to make it probable that a reasonable jurist would have been alerted to the existence of the federal question? Neither is the answer wholly in the eye of the beholder. Or that there is either an absence of available State corrective process or the existence of circumstances rendering such process ineffective to protect the rights of the prisoner. (c) An applicant shall not be deemed to have exhausted the remedies available in the courts of the State.
	OPINION/ORDER It is ORDERED. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order and accompanying Opinion to complainant and the subject judges. See 28 U.S.C. s 372(c)(3) (1994). magistrate judges will not ". The matter is then referred to the Chief Judge of the Circuit. May dismiss the complaint if it is (i) not in conformity with section 372(c)(1). Making charges that are wholly unsupported.". [w]hether substantive or procedural case issues were discussed concerning lawsuits against or concern ing the Clinton Administration during [these meetings] and. Were various courses of action also discussed and/or decided upon in an effort to obtain the most favorable results for a Democrat/Clinton Administration?". It is an ". May have been topics of discussion. (3) that such discussions may have had improper components. Efforts to in crease the likelihood that the cases were treated or resolved in such a way as ".
	OPINION/ORDER The plan was to develop the land as commercial real estate. No amendment to this Agreement shall be binding on any of the parties hereto unless such amendment is in writing and is executed by the party against whom enforcement of such amendment is sought. 8.h. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. Plaintiffs claim that they were led to believe. It is uncontroverted. Some of which might have been caused when the Securities and Exchange Commission forced the CEO of one of Defendant companies to resign. There are several retailers and businesses located on the property. Plaintiffs maintain that Defendants were expressly obligated to develop this property within a finite time and that their failure to adequately perform breached both their contractual and fiduciary duties. Plaintiffs argue that they are also owed for leasing commissions and an accounting. It is from this judgment which Plaintiffs now appeal. Summary judgment is appropriate
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Such as those used by waiters in restaurants to enter customer orders.1 Appellee Richard Stack is Aspeon's Chief Executive Officer. Appellee Horace Hertz is Aspeon's former Chief Financial Officer. Is an institutional investor and one of the shareholders who purchased stock in Aspeon between October 28. Aspeon was a 1 Aspeon was formerly known as Javelin Systems. At issue in this case are the 10 Qs for the quarters ending September 30. Aspeon was de listed from the NASDAQ on January 4. Controls any person liable under any provision of this chapter or of any rule or regulation thereunder shall also be liable jointly and severally with and to the same extent as such controlled person to any person to whom such controlled person is liable. Eight separate shareholder suits were filed against Aspeon. In the light of the circumstances under which they were made. This policy is
	WARSHAWSKY & CO V. NLRB With him on the briefs was John N. With him on the brief were Linda Sher. McGann argued the cause for intervenor. With him on the brief was Travis J. We grant the petition. I. Warshawsky (the Company) sells automobile parts and accessories and is currently constructing a warehouse and mail order facility in LaSalle. The union stopped later that day after being told that Automotion was not yet working at the site. that any subsequent picketing of Automotion should be con ducted only when Automotion was working on the site: Mon day through Friday from 4 p.m. to 6 a.m. Various union agents stationed themselves in close proximity to the LaSalle site on a road that was used primarily by persons going to and from the site. The site itself was not open to members of the general public. INC. IS DESTROYING THE STANDARD OF WAGES FOR HARD WORKING UNION MEMBERS AUTOMOTION. INC. PAYS SUBSTANDARD WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS. IGNORING THE AREA STANDARDS THREATENS THE EFFORTS AND SACRIFICES OF ALL UNION MEMBERS. Iron Workers Local 386 is currently engaged in a labor dispute concerning the failure of Automotion.
	UNITED STATES V. PRICE This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > United States v. Senior Circuit Judges.<p> <p> PER CURIAM:<p> <p> John and David Price were convicted for conspiracy. John Price was also convicted of solicitation to commit a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept96/94-6668.opa_fn.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ></head><body><a name= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/99opinions/99-1438a.html">NATL CNCL RESISTANCE V. DOS<BR></A><BR> Representative Office.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200306/02-1020a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-3075.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> REVERSE its determination that no sanctions were required against MSC. MSC was convinced its superior technology would give it a competitive advantage over its rivals. Was told (1) After examining the briefs and appellate record. These cases are therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent. R. 36.3. <hr> that the building in question was already leased and the lessee. The offer was contingent upon GE's acceptance by May 23. The day the offer was made. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200705/05-1396a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Richard S. With him on the brief were Ronald E. With him on the brief were Richard G. LLC ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTU4MDUtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-5805-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That the risk of Warnaco's financial collapse was thereby concealed. The district court concluded that: [i] Deloitte was not liable for Warnaco's quarterly statements. The Allegations as to the 1999 Form 10 K Warnaco's initial Form 10 K for the year 1999 was filed on March 31. Amended forms were filed on April 3. The allegation as to the 1999 10 K is that total 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 shareholder equity ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200306/02-1087a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/April2004/022859p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Degree to Which the Expert Testifying Is Qualified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 8. That there are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200705/05-5359a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Robert L. With her on the brief were Kenneth L. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Plaintiffs are citizens who petitioned various parts of the Legislative and Executive Branches for redress of a variety of grievances that plaintiffs asserted with respect to the Government's tax. I Plaintiffs are numerous individuals and an organization that creatively calls itself </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Jun2004/Jun25/02-21200-CR0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> It took down with it Our present focus is upon one many members of its supporting cast. of those. The indictment leading to the conviction was returned on March 7. Which the government said Andersen knew was imminent and inevitable. Was an investigation by the SEC into the relationship between Enron and Andersen. The verdict was returned on June 15. We are not persuaded that this conviction is flawed by reversible error and we affirm the judgment of conviction. From 1997 through 2001 the He was in turn subject engagement team's leader was David Duncan. to certain managing partners and accounting experts in Andersen's Chicago office. Enron was a valued client producing 58 million dollars in revenue in 2000 for Andersen with projections of 100 million for the next year. This was a close relationship. Part of this picture included Enron's These were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0988n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court held that the evidence relied on by Plaintiffs was not sufficient to support an action under the intentional tort exception to the exclusive remedy provided by the Michigan Worker's Disability Compensation Act. There is no definite way to gauge whether the ducts or the mills have been emptied. So the procedure at this facility calls for a mill to run for ten minutes at a steady stream of 91 decibels without adding any fuel before it is shut down. Plant personnel are prohibited from entering certain areas around the mill due to the heightened risk of an explosion.1 Plaintiffs were employed as maintenance mechanics at the facility. The 8A mill system was taken out of service to allow for the replacement of an oil pump. The full shut down procedure was not followed because an air fan stopped unexpectedly. The system was not restarted to complete the shut down procedure. They did not inform anyone that they were 1 This opinion will refer to those areas as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0110p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petitioner Robert Carl Foley was convicted of murder in Kentucky and sentenced to death. Were gathered at the Foley home when Foley returned from a car auction with his friend Danny Joe Bryant. Who was intoxicated and belligerent. You caused me to have to kill my partner. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200706/04-3138d.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jr. was on the renewed motion to unseal. Was on the response to the renewed motion to unseal. Dow Jones argues that there is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19946141.OPA.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> PER CURIAM: John and David Price were convicted for conspiracy. John Price was also convicted of solicitation to commit a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 373 (1988). While David Price was separately convicted for using interstate commerce facilities in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1958 (1988). With the intent to commit murder for hire.1 John Price was sentenced to 360 months imprisonment and fined. David Price was sentenced to 300 months in Honorable Harlington Wood. Both Prices were charged with tampering with witnesses. Were acquitted on those two counts. 1 * prison and was ordered to pay fines as well. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY John Price was president of Price Rubber Corporation. The Prices have always believed that Auburn Nothing resident David Hawthorne was responsible for the arson. came of their suspicions for a time. Kenny was affiliated with the Prices' enterprise. On the belief that he was stealing from the company. Acquainted with John and David Price) was the Prices' initial contact with the underworld.2 In November. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/29CF79BB69A569228825726C00839C81/$file/0670430.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: Salmon and steelhead1 are two of the great natural A steelhead is a rainbow trout which has spent part of its life at sea. As these dams were constructed. Only about one million fish return for spawning that is essential to the species' survival in the Columbia River system. The Bonneville Power Administration ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug96/93-3230.opa.html">UNITED STATES V. ELLIS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. Senior District Judge:<p> <p> This is an appeal from an order of a magistrate judge unsealing the transcript of an <i>in camera</i> hearing on defendant Ellis's application for appointment of counsel. We find no error in the order and affirm.<p> Also before us is the consolidated appeal from Ellis's conviction. We hold that Ellis's arguments have no merit and affirm his conviction pursuant to Circuit Rule 36 1.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0226n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kessler was struck by a forklift driven by a Visteon employee. Owed Kessler a duty of care to operate its machinery in a reasonably safe manner and 2) Kessler has raised a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the operation of a forklift in proximity to pedestrians on the loading dock that day is an open and obvious activity that presents special aspects of danger under Michigan law. I Visteon is in the business of assembling automotive components. It was part of the Ford Corporation. Kessler was injured when he approached an operating powered material handling vehicle ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/041782p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/761F198CBF88F75988256A1D005E8ED1/$file/9935320.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We asked the parties to notify us within 48 hours if negotiations were progressing and more time was needed. We consider whether such speech is protected by the First Amendment. 3928 I During a 1995 meeting called to mark the anniversary of Roe v. The poster was later published in an affiliated magazine. The district court concluded that Horsley was an agent of ACLA and other defendants as well as a co3929 doctors and others who provide or support abortion and called on visitors to supply additional names.2 The website marked the names of those already victimized by anti abortion terrorists. The state law claims were abandoned before trial. The district court submitted to the jury only the FACE and RICO claims. 3930 were harmed by defendants' speech. The district court instructed the jury that defendants could only be liable if their statements were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/75ED5FF195B93D3F88256E5A00707C48/$file/0016181.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The threshold question is whether the Tribe is immune from suit. We conclude that it is not. We next address whether the Tribe is subject to the ADEA in these circumstances. We 10714 conclude that it is not. Resolution of this issue is a pure question of law that is currently ripe for review and. Is best resolved at the subpoena enforcement stage. The Tribe does not have its own reservation but instead occupies land held in trust by the United States. Is a governmental arm of the Tribe. Was particularly concerned with </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200707/04-5313a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200306/02-5069a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2439.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Were on brief. The motions were predicated in part on a state official's qualified immunity from suit. § 4 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.</P> <P> Both plaintiffs worked at the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's Department of Justice.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043848p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are asked who owns the founder's surname. We are also asked whether defendants the founder's grandson and his business have engaged in trademark infringement. Because we conclude that plaintiff has not met its burden of showing that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. We will reverse and remand for further proceedings. Although the personal aspects of this dispute are not material to our resolution of this appeal. The history of the Doebler family businesses is critical to this matter. A case that is now before us for a second time. 4 A. Other family members were involved in the business as well. All three families were represented on Hybrids' board of directors as well. Jones and Camerer are officers. The Partnership's original functions were ultimately split between Partnership. Doebler III had ties to all three entities: he was partnered with his father in the Partnership and remains an owner of the successor LLC. He is co owner of Farmland. He was but no longer is a shareholder. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021160.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Baljit Aulakh is the president and sole shareholder of Superior Management Services. Pavitar Aulakh is Baljit Aulakh's wife. Capitol Indemnity Corporation ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021153.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lines 1 2 the phrase is corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-2429.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C.</span> were on brief. Were on brief </span><span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/08/981161P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was demoted from his position as warden of the state maximum security unit after he spoke out about corruption and lack of security in the institution. Terry Campbell was employed in the Arkansas state prison system for seventeen years prior to his appointment as warden of the Tucker Maximum Security Unit on The Honorable Gary A. The Director of the Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) was Larry Norris. He was the official who appointed Campbell warden at Tucker. Part of the reason he offered him the Tucker position was because he believed Campbell was strong on policy. Campbell was regarded by others in the system as meticulous in his implementation of ADC policies and procedures. When Campbell arrived at Tucker he was faced with morale and turnover problems and numerous vacant staff positions. Illegal contraband was moving into and within the prison so he instituted policies to search all staff. Through his investigation he learned there were security breaches at Tucker. Cell doors which had been altered so that inmates were able to open them. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept96/94-6668.opa_fn.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ></head><body><a name= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/10/953917P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Andrews was a 17 year old Andrews was raped by Randy Fowler. Who was then a police officer for the North Sioux City Police Department. and had been drinking. She had recently graduated from high school and was preparing to enter basic training for the military. Police were called to the scene because of underage drinking and reports of several arguments at the party. Price was aware that the department had had Those officers had been trouble in the past with some officers fraternizing with and possibly even having sexual relations with minor females. officers had been hired. discharged before Price became chief of police and before any of Price's Price had. While Fowler was still on duty. Fowler offered to take Andrews home when his shift was over. taking Andrews home. He forced her to have sexual intercourse with him under threats that he would charge her with underage drinking and prevent her from being allowed into the military if she did not cooperate with his advances. of the assault. While Andrews was away at basic training. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1951.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Remmel & Zimmerman were on brief for plaintiffs. Were on brief for defendant. Agency or association.1 Violations of the Act are declared to contravene the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act. Is intended to tangibly benefit or is represented to be for the tangible benefit of any law enforcement officer. Chamberlain all of whom are officers of law enforcement associations. Seeking to enjoin the Act and to have it declared unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. While declaring that the provision for injunctive enforcement was an unconstitutional prior restraint. As the Act was originally enacted in 1977. Its sole exception was for solicitations by or on behalf of law enforcement officers campaigning for election to public office an exception still in existence. The Act was amended to allow game wardens to sell historical publications describing state parks.3 Me. Is intended to benefit or is represented to be for the benefit of any law enforcement officer. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/041788np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Liveware contends that: (1) the District Court erred in issuing the preliminary injunction where there was no showing of immediate irreparable injury to Best Software Inc. (3) the injunction is an overbroad prior restraint on speech. Our jurisdiction over the granting of an injunction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a). We will affirm. The facts are known to them. We will discuss only those facts pertinent to this appeal. Liveware is a Delaware corporation that owns and licenses a software program called R&R Report Writer. Liveware's contractual claims were submitted for arbitration in April 2002. Who was earlier assigned to the case. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july97/95-2882.opa.html">ROBBINS V. KOGER PROPERTIES, INC.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Robbins v. Deloitte informed KPI that its capitalization of interest payments was in violation of GAAP. Michael Goodbread was a partner at Deloitte with responsibility for the KPI audit. This ownership was a violation of generally accepted accounting standards (GAAS). The high dividends were one of the forces behind KPI's stock price. The dividend was increasingly sustained by sales of real estate and was a non taxable return of capital. This 15% yield was completely non taxable.<p> On September 28. Stating that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept95/94-6141.opa.html">UNITED STATES V. PRICE<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. Senior Circuit Judges.<p> <p> PER CURIAM:<p> <p> John and David Price were convicted for conspiracy. John Price was also convicted of solicitation to commit a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Jun2004/Jun17/98-20385-CV3.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> As to Petitioner Max Alexander Soffar's claims that (1) he did not have effective assistance of counsel in the guilt phase proceedings. (2) his right to counsel was violated by police interrogation regarding an extraneous offense after he had been charged with capital murder and had requested and received appointed counsel. When that interrogation was later used to obtain a death penalty at the penalty phase. This current opinion will be sometimes referred to herein as Soffar III. Soffar's conviction was based indispensably on the statements taken from him by police after three days of interrogation and without an attorney present. The single known eyewitness was neither contacted by defense counsel nor called to testify. Which could have been controverted by that uncalled eyewitness. There was no physical evidence. We address the State's argument that Soffar's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was neither properly 2 exhausted in his state habeas petition nor properly raised in his federal habeas application. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/012500.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Prime Retail is a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) that owns. It is required to distribute 95% of its income to shareholders as dividends. The company was paying quarterly dividends in amounts representing approximately 15% growth over the same quarter in the prior year. That it was acquiring Horizon Group Inc. That it was embarking on international operations by developing an outlet center in Puerto Rico. The Appellants* allege that various company insiders were aware Appellant Marsh Group. Was appointed Lead Plaintiff pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. PRIME RETAIL that the company was deteriorating during this time period. It was apparent to the company's senior management that the Horizon properties needed significant improvement funds. Internal company reports allegedly showed that vacancies were rising. Revenues were falling. The focus of this appeal is on statements made to securities analysts. The allegedly false statements were made in the second half of 1999 and during January of 2000. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug97/93-9345.ma2.html">SHAHAR V. BOWERS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Shahar v. Senior Circuit Judges.<p> <p> BY THE COURT:<p> <p> This case is before the court on Plaintiff Appellant's petition for rehearing and on her motion to supplement the record or for a remand to do so.<p> MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT<p> <p> Ms. The motion to supplement the record or to remand is DENIED.<p> Although we have inherent equitable power to supplement the record with information not reviewed by the district court. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1998/98a1958p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is a long arm service of process case which requires us. The complaint alleges that Kiekert tortiously interfered with 2 Imo's attempt to sell its wholly owned Italian subsidiary to a French corporation that was one of Kiekert's competitors. The asserted mechanism by which the tort was accomplished was a series of letters sent by Kiekert to the Italian subsidiary and to the New York investmentfirm of C.S. The sale was never consummated because of these threats. Imo contends that personal jurisdiction over Kiekert was proper based upon its contacts with Imo in New Jersey and upon Kiekert's claimed commission of an intentional tort. The effects of which were allegedly felt by Imo in New Jersey. The defendant must have committed an intentional tort. The plaintiff must have felt the brunt of the harm caused by that tort in the forum. The defendant must have expressly aimed his tortious conduct at the forum. The order of the district court will therefore be affirmed. The plaintiff bears the burden of proving that personal jurisdiction is proper. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/40EF69E0B1C8B8C38825728000821E44/$file/0436021.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 over this appeal of the final judgment of the district court. I. Phillips was convicted in state court of second degree manslaughter and sentenced to an indeterminate term of ten years imprisonment. Was subsequently incarcerated for other crimes. He was seeking access to PHILLIPS v. He was called to the library on June 8. He was unable to bind the petition on that date. Rossi/Hust </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/159D5C997C5AC90188256CCC005B8C8C/$file/0116725.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Controlling shareholders are liable under section 20(a) of the 1934 Act. Defendants in this case are America West. The shareholders were Defendants TPG Partners. Coulter was Director and Vice President of TPG and Director of America West. Schifter was Vice President of TPG and Director of America West. The following Defendants were officers and/or directors of America West: William A. The following Defendants were outside directors of America West: Stephen F. Were involved in the reorganization plan. Although the economic rights were identical between the two. The facts are presented in the light most favorable to the Plaintiffs. We also consider documents submitted by Defendants that were referenced in the complaint and whose authenticity has not been questioned. That these nine were chosen solely by TPG and Continental. TPG and Continental allegedly chose directors who were favorable to their interests. Was appointed a director of America West and served on its Executive Committee. Was also appointed to the Board of Directors and served on the Compensation Committee. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0043p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ventura maintained that he was a The Honorable Robert B. Who was a member of the panel. Were investigating Chiquita's business practices as background for a series of newspaper articles on the company. Ventura himself told Chiquita that he was speaking with Gallagher. In an apparent effort to convince Chiquita that he was not a confidential source. Not informing anybody that I was a confidential source. Chiquita knew that Ventura was gaining access to voice mailboxes of employees at a time when such access was not authorized. 1 No. 03 3440 Ventura v. Was convicted of multiple counts of Attempted Unauthorized Access to a Computer System. Was placed on probation for two years. Where Ventura was a member of a law firm. The district court also determined that summary judgment was proper because Ohio law granted </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8A8B41281E202D3B88256E1C00830BFB/$file/0215280.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Background Williams was charged in California state court with conspiracy to defraud. Williams' first trial ended when the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Claiming the challenge was improperly race based under People v. He predicted that Alice Stowe would be a hostile witness since she originally had been charged in the conspiracy and was granted immunity so the prosecutor could compel her testimony. The prosecutor stated that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1819954AA8E290CA8825701A004C6819/$file/0356135.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The banners are located so that they are visible to customers of businesses that deal with certain contractors who do not have union contracts. While the banners are displayed. Local Union Number 1506 ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/27C083DBFBE3046988256A99007ADF61/$file/9955591.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We conclude that the City has not adduced sufficient evidence to establish that there are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1996/96a1421p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment because his appellate counsel failed to press his Equal Protection claim on direct appeal. We will reverse the judgment granting relief. Sistrunk was convicted for participating in the robbery and arson of a furniture store. During which one employee was murdered and others assaulted. He was awarded a new trial due to ineffective assistance of trial counsel. He was tried again on the same charges. Was required to show a pattern and practice of racial discrimination in jury selection across multiple prosecutions. Evidence that was not tendered by Sistrunk during his second trial. Who is black. He was again convicted. Petitioner's conviction was affirmed by the Pennsylvania Superior Court. While his petition for review was pending. Holding that the Equal Protection Clause is violated whenever a state prosecutor exercises a peremptory challenge to exclude a venireperson from the jury because of his or her race. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199907/98-1277a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was John N. With him on the brief were Linda Sher. With him on the brief was Travis J. I. Warshawsky (the Company) sells automobile parts and accessories and is currently constructing a warehouse and mail order facility in LaSalle. The union stopped later that day after being told that Automotion was not yet working at the site. That any subsequent picketing of Automotion should be con ducted only when Automotion was working on the site: Mon day through Friday from 4 p.m. to 6 a.m. Various union agents stationed themselves in close proximity to the LaSalle site on a road that was used primarily by persons going to and from the site. The site itself was not open to members of the general public. IS DESTROYING THE STANDARD OF WAGES FOR HARD WORKING UNION MEMBERS AUTOMOTION. Iron Workers Local 386 is currently engaged in a labor dispute concerning the failure of Automotion. We are appealing only to the general public. We are not seeking any person to cease work or to stop making deliveries. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></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-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E8945F2F04A0292988256AA7005B8CAA/$file/0016181.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The threshold question is whether the Tribe is immune from suit. We conclude that it is not. We next address whether the Tribe is subject to the ADEA in these circumstances. We 10714 conclude that it is not. Resolution of this issue is a pure question of law that is currently ripe for review and. Is best resolved at the subpoena enforcement stage. The Tribe does not have its own reservation but instead occupies land held in trust by the United States. Is a governmental arm of the Tribe. Was particularly concerned with </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200005/96-5272a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Henk Brands. With him on the brief were David W. Albert were on the brief for amici curiae Center for Media Education. At issue is the facial constitutional ity of two provisions of the Cable Television Consumer Pro tection and Competition Act of 1992. Time Warner argues that both provisions facially that is. We conclude that both provisions are facially constitutional. The district court held that the subscrib er limits provision is unconstitutional. The channel occupancy provision is constitutional. The Standard of Review Time Warner argues that the subscriber limits provision is a content based restriction of its ability to communicate with its audience. As such is subject to strict scrutiny. See The district court at least appears to have found the channel occupancy provision constitutional on its face. Whether or not the regulations ultimately promulgated by the Commission will pass constitutional muster under [intermediate scrutiny] is. The Government denies that the subscriber limits provision is content based. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-1689.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Brett Huston are police officers for the City of Milwaukee Police Department ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/BD7FAC83AB7E4C4688256E5A00707ABF/$file/9935320.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We asked the parties to notify us within 48 hours if negotiations were progressing and more time was needed. We consider whether such speech is protected by the First Amendment. 3928 I During a 1995 meeting called to mark the anniversary of Roe v. The poster was later published in an affiliated magazine. The district court concluded that Horsley was an agent of ACLA and other defendants as well as a co3929 doctors and others who provide or support abortion and called on visitors to supply additional names.2 The website marked the names of those already victimized by anti abortion terrorists. The state law claims were abandoned before trial. The district court submitted to the jury only the FACE and RICO claims. 3930 were harmed by defendants' speech. The district court instructed the jury that defendants could only be liable if their statements were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0095n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an appeal from the district court's dismissal of Plaintiff Cadle Company's case against Jan Schlichtmann for lack of personal jurisdiction. Is an Ohio based debt collector. Have been entangled in legal battles. Cadle sued Schlichtmann to enforce a security interest it claimed to have on the The Honorable Denise Page Hood. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011289.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 1 the name </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Jun2004/Jun16/02-21200-CR0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> It took down with it Our present focus is upon one many members of its supporting cast. of those. The indictment leading to the conviction was returned on March 7. Which the government said Andersen knew was imminent and inevitable. Was an investigation by the SEC into the relationship between Enron and Andersen. The verdict was returned on June 15. We are not persuaded that this conviction is flawed by reversible error and we affirm the judgment of conviction. From 1997 through 2001 the He was in turn subject engagement team's leader was David Duncan. to certain managing partners and accounting experts in Andersen's Chicago office. Enron was a valued client producing 58 million dollars in revenue in 2000 for Andersen with projections of 100 million for the next year. This was a close relationship. Part of this picture included Enron's These were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/10/993536P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Have each brought Rule 10b 52 actions against Green Tree Financial Corporation. Contending that their complaints were indeed sufficient to plead securities fraud. Green Tree is a financial services corporation that originally specialized in lending money on house trailers. Because manufactured housing loans are classified as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/57BB9999AC16563588256EA800808651/$file/0257049.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs are six black men who were tried in California state court for the felony murder of a police officer who had been shot and killed while chasing a fleeing suspect through a San Diego park in 1988. Defendants appellants are the prosecutor in the case. The star witness at trial was the then incarcerated Darin Palmer. Four of the six plaintiffs were found guilty. One was acquitted. The five convicted defendants were sentenced to long prison terms. An article in the San Diego Union Tribune described favors provided by Burt and Cervantes to Palmer while he was a cooperating witness against plaintiffs. Were not disclosed to plaintiffs. Received time served (which was by this time several years). Were immediately released. Their motions were granted in part and denied in part. It incorrectly understood the law to require it to assume that factual allegations in a plaintiff's § 1983 complaint are true when a defendant moves for summary judgment based on official immunity. Rather simply assumed that the factual allegations in the complaint were true without regard to whether they had evidentiary support. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-3669.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jr. is a former Milwaukee police officer who was arrested for physically abusing a child. Though he was not prosecuted. Anderer was terminated following an internal affairs investigation into this incident. Finding that probable cause existed at the time Anderer was arrested and that the 2 No. 02 3669 speech at issue was not protected by the First Amendment. After the juveniles were handcuffed. While they were being escorted to the patrol cars. One 12 year old boy (whom we will call JR) started shouting that one of the officers who was escorting him to the car. Was touching him on the buttocks and trying to rape him. Three of the juveniles were then transported to the police station by Officer Cook and his partner Officer Jeffrey Logan. JR was placed in a patrol car and driven to the station by Anderer. Several officers noticed that JR was bleeding from the nose and mouth and had blood on his clothing. Mary Hoerig and Because </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/033112np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Concluding that the breach of the Agreement by Koenig was not material and did not justify the forfeiture of all benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We will reverse the judgment entered by the District Court and remand for further proceedings. Koenig was promoted to Corporate Vice President and became one of ADP's top thirty officers in a work force of approximately 37. ADP shall have. In a capacity which is the same or similar to any capacity in which [he] was involved during the last two years of . . . employment by ADP. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1238a.html">NATHAN KATZ REALTY V. NLRB<BR></A><BR> Argued the cause for respondent.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/04/01-7154.htm">01-7154 -- MONTGOMERY V. CITY OF ARDMORE -- 04/28/2004<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug96/93-3230.opa.html">UNITED STATES V. ELLIS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. Senior District Judge:<p> <p> This is an appeal from an order of a magistrate judge unsealing the transcript of an <i>in camera</i> hearing on defendant Ellis's application for appointment of counsel. We find no error in the order and affirm.<p> Also before us is the consolidated appeal from Ellis's conviction. We hold that Ellis's arguments have no merit and affirm his conviction pursuant to Circuit Rule 36 1.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199912/99-0011a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> It is ORDERED. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order and accompanying Opinion to complainant and the subject judges. Magistrate judges will not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CB8399534AEFABA188256D9B0079C65A/$file/0156447.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. All allegations of material fact in the complaint are regarded as true and construed in the light most favorable to Digital Images. Digital Images' second amended complaint was not subject to dismissal unless it appeared beyond doubt that Digital Images could prove no set of facts in support of its claims that would entitle it to relief. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-6110.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> (2) their claims were barred by the statute of limitations and (3) the truth on the market doctrine insulated Defendants from liability. Pre Paid is an Oklahoma corporation which designs. Memberships entitle their holders to receive legal (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. No page numbers or exhibit numbers are provided for the numerous exhibits which were attached to these pleadings in the district court. It traded its stock on the American Stock Exchange. <hr> services (or reimbursement of legal fees incurred for such services) in a manner similar to medical reimbursement plans or HMO's.(3) Memberships are automatically renewable but may be cancelled at any time for fraud. Sales associates are considered independent contractors and are paid by commission.(4) In general. Pre Paid advances that associate a commission equal to three years worth of commissions.(5) Pre Paid recoups these </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200001/99-3024a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is the second time that this case has come before this court. This court held that there is no First Amendment right of access to grand jury ancillary proceedings. The decision in Dow Jones also made it clear that appellants have neither a statutory right. The only issue left unresolved in Dow Jones was the meaning of the District Court's Local Criminal Rule 6.1 (formerly Local Rule 302. The District Court held that it was under no legal obligation to establish a generic rule. Press and other media organizations are allowed to file motions for public docketing in individual cases. The District Court's judgment denying appellants' request for a generic rule requiring public docketing of all grand jury related matters is affirmed. There is no constitutional. Appellants acknowledge that there is not even a widespread practice of public docketing of grand jury matters in the federal courts in the United States. The appellants' alternative request for relief is less trouble some. The District Court will duly consider the request and will. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200309/02-5045a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199810/98-3060d.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> It is ORDERED. Are no longer protected from public disclosure by Rule 6(e). It is further ORDERED. It is further ORDERED. Were on the briefs. Sexton were on the briefs. Were on the brief. Was on the brief. The principal question is whether an attorney in the Office of the President. To state the question is to suggest the answer. For the Office of the President is a part of the federal government. The Supreme Court and this court have held that even the constitutionally based executive privilege for presi dential communications fundamental to the operation of the government can be overcome upon a proper showing of need for the evidence in criminal trials and in grand jury proceed ings. There is no basis for treating legal advice different ly from any other advice the Office of the President receives in performing its constitutional functions. The extent to which the communications of White House Counsel are privileged against disclosure to a federal grand jury depends. The main focus of Independent Counsel Starr's inqui ry had been on financial transactions involving President Clinton when he was Governor of Arkansas. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200501/04-5026a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was Kirk T. With him on the brief was William H. A magistrate judge concluded that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's defense of the Act was not substantially justified. On appeal we reject the Commission's argument that it should not be held liable for fees because it was obligated to defend the statute. We also conclude that the Commission's defense was a reasonable one on the merits. Makes it unlawful for any commodity trading advisor (CTA) </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/70D03D89A5177B5688257154008058F0/$file/0316937.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was awarded over $700. CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST Defendant Berens is a research scientist at Barrow Neurological Institute. Berens is the primary researcher on a project that uses beagle dogs to research glioma. The study is designed to develop a large animal model for studying glioma and then extrapolate any knowledge gained to treat glioma in humans. This procedure had to be done during gestation to prevent the immune systems of the puppies from rejecting the gliomal cells and was designed to cause tumors to develop after the puppies were born. Berens' research was privately funded. Berens' first grant application to the NIH was rejected. His second application was approved. Relator Haight is an experimental psychologist and the Southwest Regional Director of In Defense of Animals. Haight began investigating Berens' research at the request of a student and community members who were protesting animal research conducted at Barrow and Arizona State University ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-5070a.html">AUGUSTINE DAVID HENDERSON V. ROGER KENNEDY<BR></A><BR> Argued the cause for appellees.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200411/03-1345a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1398.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Devereaux</U> was on brief. Larisa Jr.</U> was on brief. Rocha</U> and <U>Joseph Avanzato</U> were on brief. Hawkins was terminated by the Rhode Island Lottery Commission from his position as its director after a flurry of negative publicity in which his conduct in office was criticized. Particularly on unworthy state law issues.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1999/981749.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm the dismissal by the District Court. 2 Plaintiff John J. Was assigned in January 1994 to investigate possible insider trading violations growing out of a proposed bank merger. Criminal charges were lodged against Hunter in state court. Were married in May 1995. He starts sharing with her information which we believe she is now using to demand two million dollars of Mr. It is this action that presently concerns us. 1. Hunter was convicted of molestation and sentenced to eight to fourteen years imprisonment. Was sentenced to a term of incarceration. That conviction is presently on appeal. 4 The section 1985(2) count asserted that Hunter and Bochetto had conspired to file a frivolous lawsuit and disseminate defamatory information to the media to intimidate and punish Heffernan so as to affect his attendance and testimony as a witness against Hunter in federal court proceedings. It held that witnesses did not have standing to bring an action under section 1985(2). Heffernan was granted leave to amend the section 1985(1) claim with respect to the publicity campaign. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2139.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellees. This appeal is an offshoot of a massive securities fraud. Because the particulars of the lawsuit and the settlement terms are largely irrelevant to our analysis. After the details of the proposed settlement were communicated to the class in late June 1997. Among the objectors were appellant Howard M. Metzenbaum became concerned that something was amiss because the Rose Objectors apparently had secured a side settlement more favorable than the class settlement and no court had evaluated the fairness of the side settlement. 804 19 (3d Cir. 1995) (Rule 23(e) scrutiny entails a detailed inquiry into whether the proposed class action settlement is fair. Counsel for the so called </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-2148.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellee Kidder. We provide only a summary of the procedural history of this case.1 Plaintiff appellant Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito Aguada ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199807/98-3060c.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on the briefs. Sexton were on the briefs. Were on the brief. Was on the brief. The principal question is whether an attorney in the Office of the President. To state the question is to suggest the answer. For the Office of the President is a part of the federal government. The Supreme Court and this court have held that even the constitutionally based executive privilege for presi dential communications fundamental to the operation of the government can be overcome upon a proper showing of need for the evidence in criminal trials and in grand jury proceed ings. There is no basis for treating legal advice different ly from any other advice the Office of the President receives in performing its constitutional functions. The extent to which the communications of White House Counsel are privileged against disclosure to a federal grand jury depends. The main focus of Independent Counsel Starr's inqui ry had been on financial transactions involving President Clinton when he was Governor of Arkansas. That the privilege is qualified in the grand jury context and may be overcome upon a sufficient showing of need for the subpoenaed communications and unavailability from other sources. [[ ]]. [[ ]] the Office of the President [[ ]] appealed the order granting the motion to compel Lindsey's testimony. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199807/98-3060b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on the briefs. Sexton were on the briefs. Were on the brief. Was on the brief. The principal question is whether an attorney in the Office of the President. To state the question is to suggest the answer. For the Office of the President is a part of the federal government. The Supreme Court and this court have held that even the constitutionally based executive privilege for presidential communications fundamental to the operation of the government can be overcome upon a proper showing of need for the evidence in criminal trials and in grand jury proceedings. There is no basis for treating legal advice differently from any other advice the Office of the President receives in performing its constitutional functions. The extent to which the communications of White House Counsel are privileged against disclosure to a federal grand jury depends. The main focus of Independent Counsel Starr's inquiry had been on financial transactions involving President Clinton when he was Governor of Arkansas. That the privilege is qualified in the grand jury context and may be overcome upon a sufficient showing of need for the subpoenaed communications and unavailability from other sources. [[ ]]. [[ ]] the Office of the President [[ ]] appealed the order granting the motion to compel Lindsey's testimony. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0065p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an appeal from convictions for counterfeiting United States currency. The defendant contends that his indictment was multiplicitous. That evidence of prior convictions was admitted at trial improperly. That the evidence against him was insufficient to warrant submission of the case to the jury. Contending that the trial court erred both by calculating the guideline sentence range on the basis of a quantity of fake currency seized before the manufacturing process was complete and by enhancing his guideline offense level for a leadership role he denies having played. One of the inmates who attended Kelly's class was a man named Anthony Lolakis. Where he said he was well known to the authorities as a counterfeiter. Although there is some dispute as to who initiated the contact. It is clear that Lolakis. Who was back in Ohio. He purchased additional supplies in Ohio once the counterfeiting operation was underway. The fake bills were passed first in Michigan and then in Ohio by other members of the conspiracy. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200401/02-1297a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0182p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kessler was struck by a forklift driven by a Visteon employee. The * This decision was originally issued as an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/002151.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the evidence adduced by Brewer does not provide the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/07/974059P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is narrow. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/00/00-2017.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1163.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record. Is the assignee of a design patent on a drill bit. Old Jore filed a separate action against Kouvato seeking a declaratory judgment that the '575 patent was invalid and unenforceable. Its assets and name were bought by the newly organized company. The new Jore Corporation was then joined as a plaintiff and counterclaim defendant. The cases were consolidated in the United States District Court for the District of Montana. The jury found that the '575 patent was valid and enforceable but not infringed. It denied costs to Jore because the court concluded that Jore was not a prevailing party. Jore cross appeals the ruling that the patent is valid and enforceable and also challenges the district court's finding that the corporation is not a prevailing party for purposes of awarding costs. The first piece was a high speed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-5341a.html">MOORE WILLIAM G. V. VALDER, JOSEPH<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-1238a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Leonard R. The Director also found that the superintendents in Katz's buildings were not supervi sors under the National Labor Relations Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/002069.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Edell is widely recognized as a preeminent legal authority on litigaIn an affidavit submitted by Edell in the present action. Edell was the first to bring a successful suit to verdict against tobacco companies on behalf of a smoker. The litigation proposal assured the Maryland AG that if the Angelos Firm was retained. The amount of legal fees that Edell and his law firm would receive for their participation in the Maryland AG Action was always an issue to be determined solely between Edell and his law firm and the Angelos Firm. The dispute in the present case is over the amount the Angelos Firm agreed to pay Edell and his law firm for their substantial participation in the Maryland AG Action. 218 in attorneys' fees (based upon varying hourly rates) they have already received from the Angelos Firm in connection with the Maryland AG Action. They never would have continued their substantial participation in the Maryland AG Action had the Angelos Firm not made these repeated promises and the Angelos Firm fully understands this. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/00opinions/00-1372.html">HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE V. PROMEGA<BR></A><BR> Argued for plaintiffs appellants.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With her on the brief were <u>Todd A. Krause</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel on the brief were <u>Barbara A. California.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel were <u>S. Argued for defendant appellee.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief were <u>Michael E. Davis</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel on the brief were <u>Peter G. A segment of DNA is separated at high temperature into its two component strands.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Then. Small pieces of synthetic DNA called primers are annealed to specific locations on the separated strands.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Enzymes known as DNA polymerases then extend the primers by attaching a complementary nucleotide to each nucleotide in the template strand.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>In this manner. Extension is then performed repeatedly. Resulting in the production of a large number of identical DNA strands.</p> <p class=MsoBodyText2>When PCR was first developed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199806/97-1401a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs was John C. With him on the brief were Linda Sher. Circuit Judge: This is a petition for review of a supplemental decision and order of the National Labor Rela tions Board affirming an Administrative Law Judge's calcula tion of the amount of a back pay award. Thus were entitled to back pay. Bufco Corporation are Indiana corporations closely held by the Corbett family.1 For more than thirty years. International 1 Bill Corbett is the sole owner of Corbett Electrical. Initially he was also the sole owner of Bufco. Brotherhood of Electrical Workers as the exclusive bargain ing representative for its employees in its residential and commercial electrical units.2 Bufco was incorporated in 1970 and began engaging in construction work on single family and multifamily housing projects. Corbett Electric terminated its membership in NECA and informed the Union that it was repudiating both the residential and commercial bargaining agreements. The Board found that Bufco was the alter ego of Corbett Electric and that both companies had violated Sections 8(a)(5) and (8)(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/04/994021P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue before us in this appeal is whether Canon 5 of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct. Were narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest in maintaining the independence and impartiality of Minnesota's judiciary. Were not impermissibly vague. I. The Minnesota Constitution provides that judges </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Nov2002/011040.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> PA 19107 * This matter was originally heard on February 12. The Panel was reconstituted to include Judge Roth. The appeal was submitted. 2 Sharyn A. Which was implicit in Griggs v. We will affirm the judgment of the District Court in favor of SEPTA. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. There is. One undisputed fact which bears repetition because it sets the stage for what is to follow: it is undisputed that SEPTA management wanted to improve the crime fighting ability of SEPTA's force and the fitness of its officers. This case was consolidated before the District Court with United States v. That motion was granted on October 12. SEPTA officers are deployed alone and on foot. Is characterized by long distances between stations. These calls are divided into two categories. Often the only method available to get to the scene quickly is a run of five to eight city blocks. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/05-1059.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the brief were John M. It is merely descriptive. The word </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-1687_039.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The plaintiffs have accused Tellabs and its executives of engaging in a scheme to deceive the investing public about the true value of Tellabs's stock. The release proclaimed that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Oct1999/985061.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Impermissibly restricted Z.H.'s freedom of expression while he was a student in kindergarten and first grade. She also contends that the defendants' actions were so hostile toward religion as to violate the Establishment Clause. We will affirm. I. BACKGROUND Because we are reviewing the District Court's Rule 12(c) judgment on the pleadings. The following facts are affirmatively alleged in the complaint. This case arises from two incidents that occurred while Z.H. was a student at the Haines Elementary School in Medford. The first incident occurred while Z.H. was a kindergarten student. Z.H.'s teacher asked the students to make posters depicting what they were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B3653728C55546958825734D0053178F/$file/0516577.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Dibles assert that Ronald Dible was a police officer whose rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution were violated when he was terminated for participating in (performing in. Was running a website featuring sexually explicit photographs and videos of his wife. It was as simple as that. A fee was required. He was free to view the website's sexually explicit photographs and videos. The purpose of the bar meets was to have fans of the website meet Megan Dible. Were open to the public. Attendees were free to take photographs. Some of whom were partially nude. The Dibles' photographs from the bar meets were compiled on a CD ROM and were then sold through their website. After establishing that he was. The press reported that the website was run by the Dibles and that he was employed as a city police officer. The result of that publicity was disquieting to say the least. Testified that she was called a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1731.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Were on brief. <U>Chief Judge</U>.</STRONG></FONT><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTA3OTUtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-0795-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We hold that (1) the prosecution memorandum was properly withheld by DOJ under Exemption 5 of FOIA. J.) held that the Radek Memo was work product and therefore could be withheld by DOJ under Exemption 5 to FOIA. We hold that (1) the Radek 2 Memo was work product that was not adopted by DOJ in a final opinion and was properly withheld under Exemption 5. BACKGROUND The facts are fully set forth in the district court's opinion. At least one agent received a five day suspension and was put on probation for six months. Although this sanction was reduced to a letter of censure on administrative appeal. Which was denied. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Nov2001/002377.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are presented with the question of when a federal official is entitled to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTYyODAtcHJfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-6280-pr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was objectively unreasonable. Circuit Judge: The question presented here is whether the District Court improperly concluded under AEDPA review that the state court's application of Strickland v. Was objectively unreasonable for having rejected a Sixth Amendment challenge based on various alleged failures of trial counsel. Lynn was convicted for Murder in the Second Degree. Lynn is serving concurrent indeterminate terms of imprisonment of twenty years to life and six years to twelve years. Bliden was the acting First Deputy Superintendent of the Green Haven Correctional Facility. The prison where Lynn is confined. Was objectively unreasonable. Was objectively reasonable in this case. That the application for a writ of habeas corpus should have been denied. Who [] do you think you are? </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></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-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-5070a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the brief were Wilma A. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs Henderson and Phillips allege that they are evangelical Christians. Buttons and bumper stickers </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/99-1438a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 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 </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-40319.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A frivolous in forma pauperis complaint may be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(I) when there is no arguable basis in law or in fact. The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. 1 Moore alleges that his Eighth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment was violated by Defendant Timothy Campbell. Moore was injured when the press closed on his hand. Knew the press was faulty but failed to repair or retire it. A sufficiently culpable state of mind is one of deliberate indifference. Deliberate indifference is found when an official </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0102p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was induced to embark on such a course of action by the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200110/00-1141b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The same is true here: Trans Union's target marketing lists interest only Trans Union and its target marketing customers. Trans Union's lists are not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200310/02-1283a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6C787AC61C157D8E88257074005A456D/$file/0355166.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The question presented is whether California Assembly Bill 1889. Is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act.1 As we explain. The California statute chills employers from exercising their free speech rights that are explicitly protected by Congress under the National Labor Relations Act. That the use of the state spending power is rarely a defense to state interference with the National Labor Relations Act. 290 91 (1986) (emphasizing that Congress would not have intended to allow states to interfere with the NLRA </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/09/983619P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Knew or should have known of the improprieties. Palmisano was The HONORABLE JOHN B. I. The Defamation Claim Allina is a nonprofit health care corporation. An Allina staff attorney conducted the internal investigation and completed his final report on the day Palmisano was forced to resign. Mishek also noted that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTU4NTItY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5852-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Leo Kirch is the founder of KirchGroup. Who was the chief executive officer of Deutsche Bank. Stated during a German language interview by a journalist in New York City that Breuer doubted whether the financial community was willing to lend KirchGroup the money it needed to survive the 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 liquidity crisis it faced. Kirch asserts that this statement was Less false and that Breuer knew it was false when he made it. than three months later. The complaint was amended to add as a plaintiff International Television Trading Corp. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTU4NTItY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-5852-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Leo Kirch is the founder of KirchGroup. Who was the chief executive officer of Deutsche Bank. Stated during a German language interview by a journalist in New York City that Breuer doubted whether the financial community was willing to lend KirchGroup the money it needed to survive the liquidity crisis it faced. Kirch asserts that this statement was 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 false and that Breuer knew it was false when he made it. The complaint was amended to add as a plaintiff International Television Trading Corp. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTU4NTItY3YgQW1lbmRlZC5wZGY=/04-5852-cv%20Amended.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Leo Kirch is the founder of KirchGroup. Who was the chief executive officer of Deutsche Bank. Stated during a German language interview by a journalist in New York City that Breuer doubted whether the financial community was willing to lend KirchGroup the money it needed to survive the liquidity crisis it faced. Kirch asserts that this statement was Less false and that Breuer knew it was false when he made it. 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 than three months later. The complaint was amended to add as a plaintiff International Television Trading Corp. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/June1995/95a1065p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Watters' claim arose out of his termination from employment as Manager of the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) for the Philadelphia Police Department following the publication of a newspaper article in which he was quoted criticizing aspects of the EAP. The idea for a coordinated EAP grew out of a study conducted by the Philadelphia Police Study Task Force which Tucker had convened </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/98opinions/98-1230.html">INLAND STEEL INDUSTRIES, INC V. U.S.<BR></A><BR> Of counsel were <U>Michael H. With him on the brief was <U>David M. Of counsel on the brief were <U>Stephen J. Of counsel were <U>Bernd G. With him on the brief were <U>M. Usinor is a French company with domestic and international steel producing facilities. Usinor was obligated under the PACS instruments to pay to the French government the face value of the PACS. Usinor was obligated to pay interest at a rate of 0.1%. Usinor was to make principal payments and supplementary interest payments from its profits in amounts to be set by the French Minister of Economy. <U>See</U> Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determinations: Certain Steel Products From France. The FIS instruments were bonds issued to the French government s Steel Intervention Fund (<U>i.e.</U>. Usinor was obligated under the FIS instruments to pay the FIS interest at a rate of 0.1% plus an additional percentage dependent upon Usinor s profits. The first two of which were to be made by the French government. If the instruments were debt on issuance. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200111/00-5364a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Quill was on the brief for amici curiae Public Health Scientists in support of appellants. With him on the brief were Kenneth L. Acted without sufficient epidemiological evidence that dioxin is a known human carcinogen. Although we reject the Secre tary's arguments that the manufacturer lacks standing and that the upgrade decision is unreviewable. The list is * Senior Circuit Judge Williams was in regular active service at the time of oral argument. prepared biennially by the Department's National Toxicology Program ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/06/971859P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> On Lacks's claim under Missouri law that her termination by the board was not supported by substantial evidence. Which were to be performed for the other students in the class and videotaped. When the plays were videotaped. These words were used more than 150 times in approximately forty minutes. Lacks was aware of the content of the plays before they were performed. The students performed their plays and were videotaped at the direction of Lacks. Two other school district employees were also present during the videotaping of the plays: Donna Clark. The board issued a decision which found that Lacks was The Ferguson Florissant Student Discipline Code prohibits two types of student behavior. Type II behavior includes behavior </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200402/03-3043a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTc4NzVfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-7875_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: We are faced today with the question of whether plaintiff. (4) that her removal was in retaliation for her stated political views and consequently in violation of the First Amendment. That her allegations are insufficient to make out a Fourth Amendment violation or a substantive due process violation. We conclude that her First Amendment and procedural due process liberty interest claims are viable. Our undertaking here is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept98/97-4786.man.html">UNITED STATES V. FOSTER (9/24/1998, NO. 97-4786)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge:</P> <P> This is an appeal from a 41 month sentence for conspiracy to possess counterfeit currency in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (1997) ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept99/98-9253.man.html">BRYANT V. AVADO BRANDS, INC. (9/3/1999, NO. 98-9253)<BR></A><BR> Chief Judge:</P> <P><CENTER>INTRODUCTION</CENTER> </P> <P> This is a securities class action lawsuit brought by shareholders of Apple South. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200310/02-1312a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/10/021757P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Keith Dwayne Nelson was sentenced to death. They left the A 1 parking lot in a white Ford F 150 pickup truck that Nelson was driving. Nelson also told Robinson that he wanted to do this because he was going back to prison for other charges and that he wanted to go back for something big. He decided not to contact the police because he thought that Nelson must have been joking. Just three days later Michanne Mattson was attacked outside of her apartment building. Mattson was driving home from a friend's house in the early morning when she passed a white pickup truck parked alongside the road. Exclaiming that she had better shut up and that he was going to kill her. That now was the time to do it. Ten year old Pamela Butler was rollerblading in the street near her residence in the same area. The witness was able to write down the license plate number of the truckMissouri plate number 177 CE2. The truck was gone. The truck was found abandoned the next day in Kansas City. A police dog that had been provided with some of Pamela's clothing was dispatched to Nelson's mother's house and alerted to an afghan found inside the residence. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200505/04-7027a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The order provided: As to employees who are not subject to collective bargaining agreements. Upon the establishment by the receiver of published personnel policies for the governing of employees who are not subject to collective bargaining agreements. The personnel policies established by the receiver for employees who are neither at will employees. Shall provide that these employees shall not be terminated except for cause or misconduct or for nonperformance of duty or due to abolition of their position (as these terms are defined by the receiver in the published personnel policies). She was responsible for supervising the Office of Public Information. The consultants determined that her position was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTc5NDhfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-7948_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs' core allegation is that Merrill Lynch. Recommended that investors purchase certain publicly traded stocks even though they did not then believe that the issuing companies were a good investment. The district court ruled that the complaints were time barred and (even if not timebarred) that they fail to plead loss causation as required by the decisions of this Court. We conclude that the underlying complaints were timely filed. Even though the analysts did not then believe that those companies were a good investment. It is alleged that analysts were touted to investors as independent assessors of business prospects. Judge Pollack concluded: [i] that the suits were time barred and (in any event) that they fail [ii] to plead loss causation. We conclude that the underlying complaints were timely filed. The NYAG's papers cited dozens of internal communications that expressed bluntly negative views on internet stocks that the Firm's analysts were then recommending to the investing public. Some 140 class action complaints were filed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200310/02-1337a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july97/95-2882.opa.html">ROBBINS V. KOGER PROPERTIES, INC.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Robbins v. Deloitte informed KPI that its capitalization of interest payments was in violation of GAAP. Michael Goodbread was a partner at Deloitte with responsibility for the KPI audit. This ownership was a violation of generally accepted accounting standards (GAAS). The high dividends were one of the forces behind KPI's stock price. The dividend was increasingly sustained by sales of real estate and was a non taxable return of capital. This 15% yield was completely non taxable.<p> On September 28. Stating that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june98/96-9249.man.html">ELAN PHARM. RESEARCH CORP. V. EMPLOYERS INS. OF WAUSAU (6/26/1998, NO. 96-9249)<BR></A><BR> Plc ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/05/99-6387.htm">99-6387 -- U.S. V. SPARKS -- 05/02/2001<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0884n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Walter Watkins ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200506/02-1387a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A781AD0539DEC11F88256E5A00707C0A/$file/9955591.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We conclude that the City has not adduced sufficient evidence to establish that there are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept99/98-9253.man.html">BRYANT V. AVADO BRANDS, INC. (9/3/1999, NO. 98-9253)<BR></A><BR> Chief Judge:</P> <P><CENTER>INTRODUCTION</CENTER> </P> <P> This is a securities class action lawsuit brought by shareholders of Apple South. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2001/995485.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The order was issued in connection with an in camera hearing where plaintiffs' attorneys. We will vacate the sanction.1 1. Because a full procedural and factual background of the Cendant litigation is set forth in numerous published opinions. 2 we will only discuss the facts most relevant to the resolution of the issues presented in this appeal. Cendant Corporation announced that it had uncovered substantial accounting irregularities and would have to restate reported annual and quarterly earnings for 1997 and possibly earlier. Some 64 lawsuits (mostly class actions) were filed against Cendant. All but one were consolidated. Among the fifteen motions filed was one submitted by Sirota. To have their clients. Appointed as lead plaintiffs and to have themselves appointed lead counsel. The Cendant cases have also spawned a number of appeals to our Court. Neither Aboff nor Wilson was selected as a lead plaintiff. Reasoning that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3995_016.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs are charities that Indiana's Telephone Privacy Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7FEB6303A3722B1C88256DFA0000D73C/$file/0156447.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Published at 343 F.3d 1000 (9th Cir. 2003) is amended as follows: Footnote 4 appearing on page 1013 is deleted and replaced by new footnote 4. Which reads as follows: Nor is it (1) Hairston v. 101 F.3d 1315 (9th Cir. 1996) (where antitrust standing was questionable and where the plaintiffs failed to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/06/01-1512.htm">01-1512 -- FLEMING V. JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT -- 06/27/2002<BR></A><BR> Holding that the District's guidelines governing a tile painting project at Columbine High School ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/05/023536U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> To whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 2 1 A true copy. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0145p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendants argue that this court can affirm the district court's opinion on summary judgment grounds or on the grounds that the plaintiffs have failed to state a claim 26 Helwig. When defendants chose to speak they have a duty to provide complete and non misleading information regarding those statements. The effect of the Court's decision seems to be that no statements about the future prospects ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/05/00-6054.htm">00-6054 -- CAMFIELD V. CITY OF OKLAHOMA -- 05/04/2001<BR></A><BR> Whose rented copy of the movie was obtained from him at his apartment by three OCPD officers. Was unsuccessful on his section 1983 claims and his attempt to have Oklahoma's child pornography statute. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/054799np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Lavelle retaliated against him for attempting to redress his grievances </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1928.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Were on brief. The tubes were used by Wellons. Wellons was awarded some but not all of what it sought. Saint Gobain filed for declaratory relief that it was not liable under warranties it provided in the contract selling the tubes to Wellons. Saint Gobain claimed that the breakage was not caused by a defect in the tubes and that. The date by which the parties agreed delivery of all the tubes was complete. </FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200506/05-5009a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/03-5204a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/02/963231P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Tucker was indicted in a twenty one count indictment. Tucker was indicted on the conspiracy charge and ten substantive counts based on individual transactions. The district court dismissed Counts 8 11.1 The remainder of the case was submitted to the jury. Tucker contends the convictions should be reversed because after trial it was discovered that a juror was married to a former state prisoner to whom Tucker. Tucker further objected to the empaneling of a juror who gave answers to a written jury questionnaire that were inconsistent with a defendant's right to remain silent and the presumption of innocence. Tucker contends that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of mail fraud and conspiracy. Hale was a municipal judge in Little Rock. All were active in state politics in one capacity or another and all had multifarious business interests. Hale told McDougal that the lending limit was $150. The lending limit was a function of the amount of capital Hale had available to invest in Capital Management Services. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C10A20F4FB4F5D568825729C007D2C72/$file/0550882.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ZOLP 2979 ceedings: (1) the district court's factual finding that the involved stock was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/97opinions/97-7178a.html">NOVECON LTD V. BULGARIAN-AMERICAN ENTERPRISE FUND<BR></A><BR> McFadden argued the cause for appellants. </p> <p>With him on the briefs was John M. With him on the briefs was Gary H. ) are private firms engaged in developing busi </p> <p>ness projects in Bulgaria. Plaintiff Richard Rahn is president of both compa </p> <p>nies. Ronald Utt is their managing director. ) </p> <p>is a not for profit corporation established pursuant to the </p> <p>Support for East European Democracy Act. Defendant Frank </p> <p>Bauer is the Fund's president and defendant Nancy Schiller </p> <p>is the managing director of its Chicago office.</p> <p>A</p> <p>In 1991. The correspondence contemplated </p> <p>that the Batsov family would have a 26 percent stake in the </p> <p>building complex. Was written on May 20. It </p> <p>stated that the Fund was ". This list is not exhaustive </p> <p>[but] should provide an overview of the role that [Novecon] </p> <p>will have.". The Fund was willing to compen </p> <p>sate Novecon with the sum of $200. This document is fairly comprehensive. Undoubtedly </p> <p>there will be some need to clarify certain points now or as we </p> <p>proceed.". </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7F465228AE63142988256A8F005D18C3/$file/0035293.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: OVERVIEW We are presented with the question of whether there is subject matter jurisdiction in this case. Removed this action to federal court on the ground that it was an instrumentality of a foreign state as defined by the Federal Sovereign Immunities Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/06/013971P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. Background CHMS is the health care model that Arkansas currently uses to provide early intervention diagnostic and therapy services to Medicaid eligible children between the ages of six months and six years in order to help make them ready for school. It is designed to serve children who </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/991489OR.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The Associated Press have petitioned for a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to unseal certain documents filed in United States v. The documents at issue were filed as exhibits in support of several of Steele's pretrial motions. The documents were filed under seal because they were subject to a blanket protective order that controlled discovery. We believe that the pretrial motions here are part of the proceedings to which the traditional First Amendment right of access applies. Only the Government (the Office of Independent Counsel) urges sealing in the proceedings here. such proceedings a to which must a First Amendment right of In access is attaches. See 882 F.2d That is. (2) provide interested persons an opportunity to object before sealing is ordered. If any materials marked </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200302/01-1427a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="2