alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. New York Trust Company, as Trustee, Appellant, against William S. Miller et al., Constituting the Tax *916Commission of the City of New York, Respondents. (Taxes of 1940-1941.) The People of the State of New York ex rel. Manufacturers Trust Company, as Successor Trustee to New York Trust Company, Appellant, against Joseph Lilly et al., Constituting the Tax Commission of the City of New York, Respondents. (Taxes of 1941-1942.)

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.; Martin, P. J., dissents. Settle order on notice.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MEDTOX Scientific, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Richard J. Braun, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

| Dated:   October 30, 2007 | By:   /s/ Richard J. Braun                |
|---------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
|                      | Richard J. Braun

Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

 

35

 

----
#### § 418.21 Diversion of Truckee River water to Lahontan Reservoir, July through December.

Truckee River diversions through the Truckee Canal to Lahontan Reservoir from July through December must be made only in accordance with the Adjustments to Lahontan Reservoir Storage Targets table and § 418.22. Diversions shall be started to achieve the end-of-month storage targets listed in the table in § 418.22 and will be discontinued when storage is forecast to meet or exceed the end-of-month storage targets at the end of the month. Diversions may be adjusted any time during the month as conditions warrant (i.e., new forecasts, information from other forecasts becoming available, or any other new information that may impact stream forecasts).
#### Gaither, next friend, *v.*Lee *et al.*

November 18, 1910.

Complaint. Before Judge Pendleton. Fulton superior court, December 16, 1909.

*Middlebroolc, Rogers & Knox,*for plaintiff.

*J. D. Kilpatrick,*for defendants.

Holden, J.

Where the father of a minor and another entered into a contract whereby the former bound his six-year-old child to the latter until the child was twenty-one years of age, with the right to control and have the services of such child until that time, and the person to whom the child was bound agreed “to give her one hundred dollars ($100.00) to start with when she becomes of age,” and the employer died when the child was 16 years of age, neither the child nor the father would be entitled to a recovery out of the estate of the deceased employer, where the services of the child were of no greater value than what was done for and received by her. *Harris*v. *Johnson,*98 *Ga.*434 (25 S. E. 525). *Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concxir.*
#### § 4.1180 Purpose.

The purpose of §§ 4.1180-4.1187 is to govern applications filed under section 525(b) of the act for expedited review of orders of cessation for which temporary relief has not been granted under section 525(c) or section 526(c) of the act. If a person is qualified to receive a 30-day decision under these regulations, he may waive that right and file an application under § 4.1164, and the procedures in § 4.1160 *et seq.* shall apply. If there is a waiver as set forth in § 4.1186, the final administrative decision shall be issued within 120 days of the filing of the application.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 5, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 59603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22312]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel, Asthma Exacerbations: Biology and Disease 
Progression.
    Date: October 27, 2004.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Sheraton Columbia Hotel, 10207 Wincopin Circle, Columbia, 
MD 21044.
    Contact Person: Arthur N. Freed, PhD, Review Branch, Room 7186, 
Division of Extramural Affairs, National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, MSC 
7924, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-0280.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel, Review of Institutional National Research 
Service Award (T32) and Research Scientist Development Awards 
(K01s).
    Date: November 3, 2004.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Zoe Huang, MD, Health Scientist Administrator, 
Review Branch, Room 7190, Division of Extramural Affairs, National 
Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, 
6701 Rockledge Drive, MSC 7924, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-435-
0314.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart, and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 28, 2004.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 04-22312 Filed 10-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
§ 4.1003 Which rules of procedure and practice apply? ( a ) The rules which apply to the hearing process under this subpart are the provisions of §§ 4.1001 through 4.1051.
( b ) Notwithstanding the provisions of § 4.20, the general rules in subpart B of this part, do not apply to the hearing process, except as provided in § 4.1017(a).
#### § 429.21 If I overpay Reclamation's administrative costs, can I get a refund?

If, in reviewing your application, Reclamation uses all the monies you have paid, you will not receive a refund regardless of whether you receive a use authorization. If the money collected from you exceeds administrative costs, a refund of the excess amount will be made to you consistent with Reclamation's financial policies.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1


         CONSENT OF REGISTERED INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


To: Cell Wireless Corporation (formerly Arizona Aircraft Spares, Inc.)

We consent to the incorporation by reference on Registration Statements on Form
S-8 (No. 333-118252) of Cell Wireless Corporation (formerly Arizona Aircraft
Spares, Inc.) of our report, which includes an explanatory paragraph regarding
the substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going
concern, dated May 23, 2005, included in Cell Wireless Corporation's Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004


                                    /s/ RUSSELL BEDFORD STEFANOU MIRCHANDANI LLP
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                        Russell Bedford Stefanou Mirchandani LLP


McLean, Virginia
May 25, 2005
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40803

Summary Calendar

PURVIS RAY CARTWRIGHT

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

T C OUTLAW, Warden

Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:05-CV-797

Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Purvis Ray Cartwright, federal inmate # 59478-079, appeals the dismissal

without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies. Cartwright challenged a prison disciplinary hearing

and the resulting loss of good time credit. This court reviews a district court’s

dismissal of a § 2241 petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies for

an abuse of discretion. Fuller v. Rich, 11 F.3d 61, 62 (5th Cir. 1994).

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 19, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-40803

2

Cartwright first argues that he did exhaust his administrative remedies.

However, Cartwright’s appeal to National Inmate Appeals Administrator,

despite the Regional Director’s order for a rehearing, did not exhaust his

administrative remedies. If an “agency has offered to reexamine its decision it

should be permitted to do so.” Smith v. Thompson, 937 F.2d 217, 219 (5th Cir.

1991). Cartwright’s administrative appeals following the rehearing also do not

show exhaustion because the rehearing and subsequent administrative appeals

all occurred after he had filed his § 2241 petition. See Fuller, 11 F.3d at 62.

Cartwright also argues that exhaustion should be excused because the

extensive delay in scheduling the rehearing suggests that exhaustion would be

futile and because the administrative process was biased against him.

Exceptions to the exhaustion requirement arise when “available administrative

remedies either are unavailable or wholly inappropriate to the relief sought, or

where the attempt to exhaust such remedies would itself be a patently futile

course of action.” Fuller, 11 F.3d at 62 (internal quotation marks and citation

omitted). These exceptions “apply only in extraordinary circumstances,” and the

petitioner bears the burden of establishing that administrative review would be

futile. Id. The fact that Cartwright did successfully appeal to the Regional

Director following his first hearing demonstrates that the review process was not

“unavailable,” “inappropriate,” or “patently futile.” See id.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsProgress in multirate digital control system designA new methodology for multirate sampled-data control design based on a new generalized control law structure, two new parameter-optimization-based control law synthesis methods, and a new singular-value-based robustness analysis method are described. The control law structure can represent multirate sampled-data control laws of arbitrary structure and dynamic order, with arbitrarily prescribed sampling rates for all sensors and update rates for all processor states and actuators. The two control law synthesis methods employ numerical optimization to determine values for the control law parameters. The robustness analysis method is based on the multivariable Nyquist criterion applied to the loop transfer function for the sampling period equal to the period of repetition of the system's complete sampling/update schedule. The complete methodology is demonstrated by application to the design of a combination yaw damper and modal suppression system for a commercial aircraft.Document ID19910018563Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsBerg, Martin C.*(Washington Univ. Seattle, WA, United States)*Mason, Gregory S.*(Washington Univ. Seattle, WA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1991Subject CategoryCyberneticsReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-187561NAS 1.26:187561Accession Number91N27877Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-64-30-01CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG1-1055Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910018563.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of General Motors Corporation (the
      "Corporation") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Sean
      Yaakov Fulda _,
      Principal Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that
      to the best of my knowledge:





1.
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Corporation.


By
              /s/
                  Sean Yaakov FuldaSean
                  Yaakov FuldaPrincipal
                  Executive OfficerAugust
                  20, 2007
EXHIBIT “4”

Case 1:20-cv-21906-XXXX Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 1 of 4
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 

ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND 

FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION

CASE NO. 2020-008305-CA-01 (27)

HAZEL THOMPSON BRYANT, 

Plaintiff,

v.

AMERICAN SECURITY INSURANCE 

COMPANY and SELECT PORTFOLIO 

SERVICING, INC.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

)

) 

)

/

NOTICE OF FILING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on May 6, 2020, a Notice of Removal pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. §1446(d) of the above-entitled action was filed in the United States District Court for the 

Southern District of Florida, on behalf of Defendant AMERICAN SECURITY INSURANCE 

COMPANY. The filing of the Notice of Removal in the United States District Court and this 

Notice of Filing in this Court effects the removal of this action from state court. A copy of the 

Notice of Removal filed in the United States District Court is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”

Respectfully submitted this 6th day of May, 2020.

Case 1:20-cv-21906-XXXX Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 2 of 4
CASE NO. 2020-008305-CA-01 (27)

2

Respectfully submitted,

WARGO & FRENCH, LLP

Counsel for Defendant American Security 

Insurance Company

201 S. Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1000

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone: (305) 777-6000

Facsimile: (305) 777-6001

Email: eholober@wargofrench.com

Service: flservice1@wargofrench.com

By: /s/ Evan M. Holober ___________

DANIEL H. PEREZ

Florida Bar No. 106141

EVAN M. HOLOBER

Florida Bar No. 1012320

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served via 

E-Service upon: Maxwell S. Barnard Esq., Watson, Espinal, Barnard, PLLC, Counsel for 

Plaintiff at [ME@weblawfl.com] and [LS@weblawfl.com] on May 6, 2020. 

/s/ Evan M. Holober_____________

 EVAN M. HOLOBER

Case 1:20-cv-21906-XXXX Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 3 of 4
EXHIBIT “A”

Case 1:20-cv-21906-XXXX Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                CERTIFICATIONS OF
                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                  AND PRINCIPAL

            ACCOUNTING OFFICER PURSUANT TO U.S.C. SECTION 302 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Harry Chauhan, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Atlantic Wine  Agencies,
Inc.

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

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

4. I am responsible for  establishing  and maintaining  disclosure  controls and
procedures  (as  defined  in  Exchange  Act Rules  13a-14  and  15d-14)  for the
registrant and have:

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

      b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures  as of a date  within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the  disclosure  controls and  procedures  based on our  evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. I have disclosed,  based on my most recent  evaluation,  to the  registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's  board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

      a) all  significant  deficiencies  in the design or  operation of internal
controls  which  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability to record,
process,  summarize  and  report  financial  data  and have  identified  for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

      b) any fraud,  whether or not material,  that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. I have indicated in this annual report whether there were significant changes
in  internal  controls  or in other  factors  that  could  significantly  affect
internal  controls  subsequent  to the  date  of  our  most  recent  evaluation,
including any  corrective  actions with regard to significant  deficiencies  and
material weaknesses.

Date: June 28, 2004

/s/ Harry Chauhan
-----------------------------------
Name: Harry Chauhan
Title: Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Jose KINTANA-CAMACHO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-40535.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Molly E. Odom, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Juan Jose Kintana-Camacho (Kintana) pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation and was sentenced to 77 months of imprisonment and a three-year term of supervised release.

Kintana argues for the first time on appeal that the district court erred in ordering him to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample as a condition of supervised release and that this condition should therefore be vacated. This claim is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction because it *255is not ripe for review. *See United States v. Riascos-Cuenu,*428 F.3d 1100, 1102 (5th Cir.2005), *petition for cert, filed*(Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662). Kintana concedes that *Riascos-Cuenu*forecloses his argument, but he raises it to preserve it for further review.

Kintana also challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). His constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Kintana contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *AlmendarezTorres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert, denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Kintana properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-16-00775-CV

In re Miguel Castillo

R. H., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE 421ST DISTRICT COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY, 

NO. 15-FL-221, THE HONORABLE TODD A. BLOMERTH, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R T O S H O W C A U S E

PER CURIAM

This is a contempt proceeding ancillary to the appeal of R. H. The subject of this 

proceeding is Miguel Castillo, appellant’s attorney.

Appellant filed her notice of appeal on November 14, 2016, and her brief was due 

January 3, 2017. On December 29, 2016, we ordered counsel to file appellant’s brief no later 

than January 23, 2017. To date, appellant’s brief has not been filed. 

Therefore, it is hereby ordered that Miguel Castillo shall appear in person before 

this Court on Wednesday, February 22, 2017, at 9:00 a.m., in the Third Court of Appeals 

courtroom, located on the first floor of the Price Daniel, Sr. Building, 209 West 14th Street, in 

Austin, Travis County, Texas, to show cause why he should not be held in contempt and have 

sanctions imposed for his failure to obey our December 29, 2016 order. This order to show 
cause will be withdrawn and Castillo will be relieved of his obligation to appear before this 

Court as ordered above if the Clerk of this Court receives appellant’s brief on or before

February 21, 2017 at 12:00 p.m.

It is ordered on February 1, 2017.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Field and Bourland
§ 3138.10 When will BLM enter into a subsurface storage agreement in NPR-A covering federally-owned lands? BLM will enter into a subsurface storage agreement in NPR-A covering federally-owned lands to allow you to use either leased or unleased federally-owned lands for the subsurface storage of oil and gas, whether or not the oil or gas you intend to store is produced from federally-owned lands, if you demonstrate that storage is necessary to— ( a ) Avoid waste; or
( b ) Promote conservation of natural resources.