alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KRISTIN M PERRY, SANDRA B STIER,

PAUL T KATAMI and JEFFREY J

ZARRILLO,

Plaintiffs,

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

v

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his

official capacity as governor of

California; EDMUND G BROWN JR, in

his official capacity as attorney

general of California; MARK B

HORTON, in his official capacity

as director of the California

Department of Public Health and

state registrar of vital

statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her

official capacity as deputy

director of health information &

strategic planning for the

California Department of Public

Health; PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his

official capacity as clerkrecorder of the County of

Alameda; and DEAN C LOGAN, in his

official capacity as registrarrecorder/county clerk for the

County of Los Angeles, 

Defendants,

DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, GAIL J

KNIGHT, MARTIN F GUTIERREZ,

HAKSHING WILLIAM TAM, MARK A

JANSSON and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM –

YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF

CALIOFORNIA RENEWAL, as official

proponents of Proposition 8,

Defendant-Intervenors. /

No C 09-2292 VRW

ORDER

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 573 Filed 02/04/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

2

The court has received numerous submissions from proposed

amici. Doc ##128, 370, 373, 374, 375, 377, 382, 383, 386, 537,

539, 550, 551, 554, 555, 558, 561, 562, 566, 568, 570. No party

need respond, but any party wishing to file a response to any

proposed amicus submission shall do so not later February 26, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 573 Filed 02/04/10 Page 2 of 2
# Patent

## Title
2,2-Difluoro-4-amino-1,3-benzodioxole

## Abstract

The scope of the present invention is not limited by the description, examples, and suggested uses herein and modifications can be made without departing from the spirit of the invention. The macrolide compositions of the present invention have a novel molecular skeleton from which many derivative compounds or series of compounds may be prepared The present invention contemplates such derivatives as modifications of the present invention and within the scope of the invention. For example, it may be noted that other derivatives of the compounds of example 1 such as halogen or alkyl substituted derivatives may be prepared that may possess antitumor, antiviral or antifungal activity analogous to those preferred embodiments described above. Further, the compositions described herein may have other useful applications such as, for example, analgesic applications or as starting materials for the preparations of other compositions. Therapeutic application of the compositions of the present invention can be accomplished by any suitable therapeutic method and technique as is presently or prospectively known to those skilled in the art. Thus, it is intended that the present invention cover the modifications and variations of this invention provided that they come within the scope of the appended claims and their equivalents.

## Background
## Claims

1. A compound of the formula: ##STR6##

2. A compound of the formula: ##STR7##

3. A compound according to the formula: ##STR8## where R.sup.1, R.sup.2, R.sup.5, and R.sup.6 are the same or different selected from --H, --OH, --OR and --OCOR, and --OCOR or together may be --O--C(CH.sub.3).sub.2 --O-- and R is lower alkyl.

4. A compound of the formula: ##STR9## wherein R.sup.1-6 are the same or different and are --H, --OH, --OR or --OCOR and plus compound is reduced and solution or treated with an acid solution.

5. An antitumor composition comprising, as an active ingredient, an effective antitumor amount of at least one compound of claim 4 and a non-toxic pharmaceutically acceptable carrier or diluent.

6. An antitumor composition comprising, as an active ingredient, an effective antitumor amount of at least one compound of claim 3 and anon-toxic pharmaceutically acceptable carrier or diluent

7. An antiviral composition comprising, as an active ingredient, an effective antiviral amount of at least one compound of claim 4 and a non-toxic pharmaceutically acceptable carrier or diluent.

8. An antiviral composition comprising, as an active ingredient, an effective antiviral amount of at least one compound of claim 3 and a non-toxic pharmaceutically acceptable carrier or diluent.

9. An antifungal composition comprising, as an active ingredient, an effective antifungal amount of at least one compound of claim 4 and a non-toxic pharmaceutically acceptable carrier or diluent.

10. An antifungal composition comprising, as an active ingredient, an effective antifungal amount of at least one compound of claim 3 and a non-toxic pharmaceutically acceptable carrier or diluent.
### §1001. Congressional findings

Congress hereby finds that—

(1) uninterrupted continuation of services over Rock Island lines is dependent on adequate employee protection provisions covering Rock Island Railroad employees who are not hired by other railroads;

(2) for those Rock Island Railroad employees not hired by other rail carriers, there is no other practicable means of obtaining funds to meet the necessary costs of such employee protection that are assumed by the Rock Island Railroad;

(3) a cessation of necessary operations of the Rock Island Railroad would have serious repercussions on the economies of the States in which such railroad principally operates; and

(4) premature cessation of services over lines which are the subject of pending purchase application would result in harm to the shipping public and could imperil continuation of vital commuter service.

(Pub. L. 96–254, title I, §102, May 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 399.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 96–254, title I, §101, May 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 399, provided that: "This title [enacting this chapter, amending sections 231f, 726, 825, 902, 911, 913, and 916 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as a note under this section] may be cited as the 'Rock Island Railroad Transition and Employee Assistance Act'."

#### Savings Provision

Pub. L. 96–254, title I, §125, formerly §124, May 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 409; renumbered §125, Pub. L. 96–448, title VII, §701(a)(1), Oct. 14, 1980, 94 Stat. 1959, provided that: "If any provision of this title [see Short Title note above] or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this title and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby."
###### Editorial Note on Part 17

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 17 appear at 87 FR 8196, Feb. 14, 2022.

#### § 17.65 Demand and notice of intent to offset.

HUD will make written demand upon the debtor pursuant to the requirements of 31 CFR 901.2 and send written notice of intent to offset to the debtor pursuant to the requirements of 31 CFR 901.3 and 31 CFR part 285, subpart A. The Secretary shall mail the demand and notice of intent to offset to the debtor, at the most current address that is available to the Secretary. HUD may refer the debt to the Treasury for collection and shall request that the amount of the debt be offset against any amount payable by the Treasury as a Federal payment, at any time after 60 days from the date such notice is sent to the debtor.
#### In the Matter of Agnes Schuck, Respondent, v. Birchwood Park Homes, Inc., et al., Appellants.

Motion by appellants for a stay, pending appeal, granted on condition that appellants perfect the appeal and be ready to argue or submit it at the September Term, beginning September 10, 1962; appeal ordered on the calendar for said term. Cross motion by respondent to dispense with the printing of her brief, granted. The respondent is directed to file six copies of her typewritten brief and to serve one copy on appellant. The record and appellants’ brief must be served and filed on or before June 25, 1962. Kleinfeld, Acting R. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
#### § 220.813 Commissioner's right to require acceleration.

Upon receipt of notice of the failure of the borrower to comply with any covenant or obligation under the security instrument or note, or otherwise being apprised thereof, the Commissioner reserves the right to require the lender to accelerate payment of the outstanding principal balance due in order to protect the interests of the Federal Housing Commissioner.
Exhibit 31.2
 Certification of Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
Pursuant to Section 302 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended by Amendment No. 1 on form
10-K/A, of Great Wolf Resorts, Inc.;
    a.
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being
prepared;b.
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles;c.
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
andd.
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an Annual Report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonable likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and
  a.
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonable likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb.
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
  By:
    /s/ JAMES A. CALDERJames A. CalderChief Financial Officer 10
### §156. Approval by Congress necessary for withdrawal, reservation, or restriction of over 5,000 acres for any Department of Defense project or facility

No public land, water, or land and water area shall, except by Act of Congress, on and after February 28, 1958 be (1) withdrawn from settlement, location, sale, or entry for the use of the Department of Defense for defense purposes; (2) reserved for such use; or (3) restricted from operation of the mineral leasing provisions of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act [43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.], if such withdrawal, reservation, or restriction would result in the withdrawal, reservation, or restriction of more than five thousand acres in the aggregate for any one defense project or facility of the Department of Defense since February 28, 1958, or since the last previous Act of Congress which withdrew, reserved, or restricted public land, water, or land and water area for that project or facility, whichever is later.

(Pub. L. 85–337, §2, Feb. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 28.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, referred to in text, is act Aug. 7, 1953, ch. 345, 67 Stat. 462, which is classified generally to subchapter III (§1331 et seq.) of chapter 29 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1301 of this title and Tables.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         127,616
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  8,195,145
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         675,525
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 14,149,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          474,549
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    593,522
<COMMON>                                       1,180,800
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   14,149,700
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               656,951
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  238,739
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             638
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                418,212
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            418,212
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   418,212
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .130
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .087
        

</TABLE>
#### § 3286.13 Waiver of rights invalid.

Any provision of a contract or agreement entered into by a manufactured home purchaser that seeks to waive any recourse to either the HUD installation program or a state-qualifying installation program is void.
### Part G—Merchant Seamen Protection and Relief

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Part G provides for a number of measures for the protection and relief of merchant seamen by requiring certain contractual obligations between the master who represents the vessel owner's interest and the seamen who are engaged or employed on board a vessel, by requiring certain proceedings when a seaman dies or a vessel is suspected of being unseaworthy, by requiring certain standards for accommodations, medicine, clothing, miscellaneous merchandise, and for the handling of special and unique problems of seamen. It also provides for a method of imposing disciplinary controls through the logging of offenses and provides penalties for specified offenses, and certain related disciplinary procedures. The provisions of this part generally do not apply to fishing vessels, whaling vessels, or yachts.
### IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on

Briefs A ugust 2, 2001
LARRY WILLIAMS v. TENNESSEE D EPARTMENT OF CORRECTION Appeal from the Chancery Court for Davidson County

No. 00-11 54-I

No. M2000-02905-COA-R3-CV - Filed August 28, 2002

W ILLI AM C. K OCH , J R ., J., concurring
. I concur with the results of the court’s opinion, not because Mr. Williams’s punishmentwas notharsh enough to ta

ke on a c onstitution al dimensi on, but ra th er because his compla

int fails to articula te a colorable claim that the Department of C orrect i on acted arbitrarily , capriciously, or illega lly by departing

from its UniformDisciplinary Procedur es. Willis v. Tenne ssee De

p’t of Corr. , No. M2000-01397-COA-R3-CV, 2002 Tenn. App. LEXI S 389, at *57-63 (Tenn. Ct. App. June 5, 2002) (Koch, J., dissenting).
One other point should be made. Less than one month ago, this court uphe ld a trial court’s dismissal of a petition for common-law writ of

certiorari filed by

a prisoner because it was not filed in the county in which the institution housing the prisoner is loca ted. We con str ued Tenn. Code Ann. § 41-21-8 03 (1997) to requir e that a lawsuit f or a cau se of actio n accru ing while a prisone r is incarcerated

must be bro ught i n the c ount y where the facil ity hous ing t h e prisoner is located. Hawkins v. Tenne ssee De p’t of Corr

. , No. M 200 1-0 047 3-C OA- R3 -CV , 20 02 T enn . Ap p. LE XIS 536, at *39 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 25, 2002).
This lawsuit was not filed in the county wher e the institution housing the prisoner is located. Ac co rd in gl y, it was filed in the wrong court based on our interpretation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 41-21- 803. If ou

r decisi on in Hawkins v. Tennessee Department of Correction applied here, the proper remedy would be

to vacate the judgment and remand the case with directions that it be transferred to the proper court for disposition in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 16 -1-116 (Supp. 2001). However, as our decision in th is case s hould

demonstrate, we have

determined that Hawkins applies prospectively

to all cases filed

after Hawkins was decided and to all cases filed before Hawkins was decided in which th

e applic ation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 41- 21-803 ha s been ra ised. I t does not a

pply to cases filed before Hawkins was decided in which the application of Tenn. Code Ann. § 41-21-803 was not raised.
This c ase was filed before our decision in Hawkins wa s f il ed , a nd ne it he r p ar ty r aised th e application of Tenn. Code Ann. § 41-21-803 either in the trial court or on appeal. Acc ordingly, we neednot, in the absence of prejudice to the judicial process, grant relief to parties who failed to take ti me ly, reasonably

available action to nullify a ny harmful ef

fect caused by

failing to heed Tenn. Code Ann. § 41-21-803.

___________________________________ WILL IAM C. KOCH, JR., JUDGE
RAVING

NE I-09

Orlando, FL

o| $s
2) 3 t
3) 3
=
uy
lc
Zao me
OS & a
Fst es bt
s
Sxzliele
a? 2) 2) 6
4 2
a 23.0 Se"
2 88 ‘i
g2le2 See ¢
ws jee jeu
2 s|2k slow
2 2/55 ios
© &

METERS”

BATHYMETRIC CONTOUR INTERVAL 10
WITH SUPPLEMENTARY 2 METER CONTOURS
DATUM IS MEAN LOW WATER |

se ao gs

ORLANDO , FLORIDA MAS7-//

abe

SUI
wee
1001
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 8 A1 88 9

. B O B B Y J O ALEXANDER-LI STER v . U.S. BANK, NATI ONAL ASSOCI ATI ON.

Th i s cas e b eg an as a d is p o ss es s o ry p ro ceed i ng i n m ag i s t rat e co u rt . Aft er t h e

m ag i s t rat e co u rt i s s u ed a wri t o f p o s s es s i o n i n fav o r o f t h e pl ai n t i ff, t h e d e f e n d an t
Bo b b y J o Al ex an d er-Li s t er ap peal ed t o t h e su p eri o r co urt

. On M arch 1 4
, 2 0 1 8 , t h e

s u p eri o r co u rt al s o is s u ed a w ri t o f p o s s es s i o n i n fav o r o f th e pl ai nt i ff. Al ex an d erLi s t er t hen fi l ed t h i s d i r e ct ap peal o n Ap ri l 12
, 20 1 8

. W e l ack j u ri s d i ct i o n fo r t wo

reas on s

. F i r s t , “ ap p eal s fro m d eci s i o n s o f t h e s u p eri o r co u rt s rev i ewi n g d eci s i o n s o f
l o wer co u rt s b y cert io rari o r d e n o v o p ro ceed i n g s s h al l b e b y ap p li cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o nary ap p eal .” B u l l o ck v. S a n d
, 2 6 0 Ga. Ap p. 8 7 4
, 8 7 5 (5 8 1 SE2 d 3 3 3 ) (2 0 0 3); see al s o O CGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (a) (1 ). Becau s e Al ex an d er-Li s t er d i d n o t fo l l o w t h e
p ro p er p ro ced u re fo r req u es t i n g ap p el l at e rev i ew i n t hi s cas e, we l ack ju ri s d i ct i o n

. Seco n d , al t h o ug h a n o t i ce of ap p eal g en eral l y m ay b e fi l ed wi t h i n 3 0 d ay s o f

en t ry o f t h e o rd er s ou g h t t o b e ap p eal ed
, ap p eal s fro m ju d g m en t s i n d i s p o s s e s s o ry
act i on s m u s t b e fi l ed wi th i n 7 d ay s o f t h e d at e th e ju d g m en t was en t ered . OCGA §
4 4 -7 -5 6 ; Ra d i o S

an d y S p ri n gs v. Al l en Ro a d Jo i n t Ven t u r e , 3 11 Ga. A p p

. 3 3 4
, 3 3 5

- 3 3 6 (7 1 5 SE2 d 7 5 2 ) (2 0 1 1 ). He r e , A l e x a n d er-Li s t er fi l ed th e n ot i ce o f ap p eal 2 9
d ay s aft er en t ry o f t h e s u p eri o r co u rt ’ s o rd er , an d t h erefo re t h i s ap p eal i s un t i m el y

. July 11, 2018Acco rd i ng l y , t h i s ap p eal i s h ereb y DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 07/11/2018
CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of INverso Corp.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
undersigned’s knowledge:

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

and

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

INverso Corp.

Date: February 14, 2006

By:   /s/   Thomas Kirchner

Thomas Kirchner

Chief Executive Officer

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

* A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 6**  **6 99** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appell ee ,
v. REON DEVAR MCILWAIN , Defendant

– Appell ant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the We st ern District of North Carolina , at Statesville
. Richard L. Voorhees , District Judge. ( 5 : 0 1

- c r - 000 0 5

- R L V

- 1 )

Submitted : August 26 , 2010 Decided: September 3, 2010

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirme d by un published per curiam opinion
.
Reon Devar McIlwain , Appellant Pro Se
. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney , Asheville, North Carolina , for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Reon Devar McIlwain appeals the district court ’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. McIlwain , No. 5:0 1

- c r - 000 0 5

- R L V

- 1 ( W .D.N.C. Apr. 29 , 2010) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional proces s.
AFFIRMED