alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Lenna M. Purdie, as Administratrix of the Estate of George Purdie, Deceased, Appellant, v. Ellison Ingram, Respondent.

Motion by appellant for leave to prosecute appeal as a poor person, granted. The appeal will be heard on a typewritten record and on appellant’s typewritten brief, which shall include a copy of the opinion, if any, of the court below. The appellant is directed to file two copies of the typewritten record and six copies of her typewritten brief and to serve one copy of each upon respondent, on or before August 20,1962. On the court’s own motion, Allan Sturim, Esq., 125-10 Queens Boulevard, Kew Gardens, H. Y., having consented to serve without compensation (except such as may be allowed by the court) is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal. Cross motion by respondent to dismiss appeal denied, on condition that appellant perfect the appeal and be ready to argue or submit it at the October Term, beginning October 1, 19-62; appeal ordered on the calendar for said term. Kleinfeld, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
----

| 1.   | Except as specifically provided herein, all terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | *** Transponder.  Intelsat agrees to provide to Customer and Customer agrees to accept from Intelsat *** (***) *** Transponder (the “*** Transponder”) meeting the performance specifications set forth in Appendix B attached hereto. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3.   | Capacity Term.  The Capacity Term for the *** Transponder Capacity shall commence on ***, *** and continue until 23:59 Greenwich Mean Time on ***, ***. |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4.   | Monthly Fee.  The Monthly Fee for the *** Transponder Capacity shall be US$***,*** per month. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5.   | Except as specifically set forth in this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the amendment remain in full force and effect. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                        |   |   |                                            |   |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/ Patricia Casey                          |   |   | /s/ Jimmy R. Sipes                              |   |
| Name: Patricia Casey                        |   |   | Name: Jimmy R. Sipes                            |   |
| Title: Senior VP and Deputy General Counsel |   |   | Title: VP Network Services & Chief Engineer |   |

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1167

In Re: MITCHELL GATEWOOD,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:08-cv-00182-RJC)

Submitted: September 29, 2010 Decided: November 16, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mitchell Gatewood, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Mitchell Gatewood petitions for a writ of mandamus, 

alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion. He seeks an order 

from this court directing the district court to act. Our review 

of the district court’s docket reveals that, on September 13, 

2010, the district court entered an order denying relief on 

Gatewood’s § 2255 motion. Accordingly, because the district 

court has recently decided Gatewood’s case, we deny the mandamus 

petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 

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 process. 

PETITION DENIED
II 

Calendar No. 342 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3368 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 26, 2005 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 6483 Lincoln Street in Gagetown, Michigan, 

as the ‘‘Gagetown Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 6483 Lincoln Street in Gagetown, Michigan, shall 

6 be known and designated as the ‘‘Gagetown Veterans Me7 morial Post Office’’. 
2 

•HR 3368 RS 

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

5 to the ‘‘Gagetown Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

Calendar No. 342 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3368 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostMemorial Post Office’’. Gagetown, Michigan, as the ‘‘Gagetown Veterans al Service located at 6483 Lincoln Street in 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported without amendment
#### § 884.124 Audit.

Where a non-Federal entity (as defined in 2 CFR 200.69) is the eligible owner of a project, or is a contract administrator under § 884.119 or § 884.120, receiving financial assistance under this part, the audit requirements in 2 CFR part 200, subpart F, shall apply.

[80 FR 75941, Dec. 7, 2015]
### §3505. Prevention of departure

Notwithstanding section 3303 of this title, a foreign vessel carrying a citizen of the United States as a passenger or embarking passengers from a United States port may not depart from a United States port if the Secretary finds that the vessel does not comply with the standards stated in the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea to which the United States Government is currently a party.

(Pub. L. 98–89, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 520; Pub. L. 102–587, title V, §5210(b), Nov. 4, 1992, 106 Stat. 5076; Pub. L. 108–293, title IV, §411(a), Aug. 9, 2004, 118 Stat. 1045.)

| Revised section | Source section (U.S. Code) |
| --- | --- |
| 3505 | 46:362(c) |

Section 3505 prohibits the departure from a United States port or place of any passenger vessel of more than 100 gross tons having berthing for at least 50 passengers, if the vessel does not comply with the international maritime safety standards applicable to United States vessels.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2004—Pub. L. 108–293 reenacted section catchline without change and amended text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "Notwithstanding section 3303(a) of this title, a foreign vessel may not depart from a United States port with passengers who are embarked at that port, if the Secretary finds that the vessel does not comply with the standards stated in the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea to which the United States Government is currently a party."

1992—Pub. L. 102–587 substituted "foreign vessel may not depart" for "foreign or domestic vessel of more than 100 gross tons having berth or stateroom accommodations for at least 50 passengers may not depart".

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

#### International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea

For International Conventions for the Safety of Life at Sea to which the United States has been a party, see section 1602 of Title 33, Navigation and Navigable Waters, and notes thereunder.
### §55107. Empty cargo containers and barges

(a) In General.—Subject to subsections (b) and (c), and on terms and conditions the Secretary of Homeland Security may prescribe by regulation, section 55102 of this title does not apply to the transportation of—

(1) empty cargo vans, empty lift vans, or empty shipping tanks;

(2) equipment for use with cargo vans, lift vans, or shipping tanks;

(3) empty barges specifically designed for carriage aboard a vessel and equipment (except propulsion equipment) for use with those barges;

(4) empty instruments for international traffic exempted from the customs laws under section 322(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1322(a)); or

(5) stevedoring equipment and material.

(b) Conditions.—

(1) Paragraphs (1)–(4).—Paragraphs (1)–(4) of subsection (a) apply only if the items named are owned or leased by the owner or operator of the vessel and transported for its use in handling its cargo in foreign trade.

(2) Paragraph (5).—Paragraph (5) of subsection (a) applies only if the items named are—

(A) owned or leased by the owner or operator of the vessel or by the stevedoring company having the contract for the loading or unloading of the vessel; and

(B) transported without charge for use in the handling of cargo in foreign trade.

(c) Reciprocity Requirement for Foreign Vessels.—This section applies to a vessel of foreign registry only if the Secretary of Homeland Security finds, based on information from the Secretary of State, that the government of the nation of registry extends reciprocal privileges to vessels of the United States.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §8(c), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1635.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 55107 | 46 App.:883 (6th proviso). | June 5, 1920, ch. 250, §27 (6th proviso), 41 Stat. 999; July 2, 1935, ch. 355, 49 Stat. 442; Pub. L. 89–194, Sept. 21, 1965, 79 Stat. 823; Pub. L. 90–474, Aug. 11, 1968, 80 Stat. 700; Pub. L. 92–163, §1, Nov. 23, 1971, 85 Stat. 486. |

Section

In subsection (a), before paragraph (1), the words "by vessels of the United States not qualified to engage in the coastwise trade, or by vessels of foreign registry" are omitted as unnecessary. In paragraph (4), the words "by the Secretary of the Treasury" are omitted as unnecessary because the section referred to provides who administers it.
CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of IASIS Healthcare LLC;
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this 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
report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
    /s/ W. Carl WhitmerW. Carl WhitmerChief Financial Officer
§ 983.58 PHA determination prior to selection. ( a ) *Analysis of units and budget.* A PHA must calculate the number of authorized voucher units that it is permitted to project-base in accordance with § 983.6 and determine the amount of budget authority that it has available for project-basing in accordance with § 983.5(b), before it issues a request for proposals in accordance with § 983.51(b)(1), makes a selection based on a previous competition in accordance with § 983.51(b)(2), amends an existing HAP contract to add units in accordance with § 983.207(b), or noncompetitively selects a project in accordance with § 983.51(c).
( b ) *Analysis of impact.* Prior to selecting a project for PBV assistance, a PHA must perform an analysis of the impact if project-basing 50 percent or more of the PHA's authorized voucher units. The analysis should consider the ability of the PHA to meet the needs of the community across its tenant-based and project-based voucher portfolio, including the impact on, among others: families on the waiting list and eligible PBV families that wish to move under § 983.261. The analysis performed by the PHA must be available as part of the public record.
#### § 945.101 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to provide for designated housing as authorized by section 7 of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437e). Section 7 provides public housing agencies with the option, subject to the requirements and procedures of this part, to designate public housing projects, or portions of public housing projects, for occupancy by disabled families, elderly families, or mixed populations of disabled families and elderly families.
### §1432. Prohibition on direct offering of commercial telecommunications service directly to consumers

#### (a) In general

The First Responder Network Authority shall not offer, provide, or market commercial telecommunications or information services directly to consumers.

#### (b) Rule of construction

Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the First Responder Network Authority and a secondary user from entering into a covered leasing agreement pursuant to section 1428(a)(2)(B) of this title. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the First Responder Network Authority from collecting lease fees related to network equipment and infrastructure pursuant to section 1428(a)(3) of this title.

(Pub. L. 112–96, title VI, §6212, Feb. 22, 2012, 126 Stat. 218.)
#### Paul Steinlauf, appellee, v. H. E. Mulliner, appellant.

Gen. No. 27,982.

Action in forcible detainer. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Bernard P. Barasa, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1922.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed May 28, 1923.

Richard A. Koch, for appellant. J. G. Turner, for appellee.

Mr, Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
        (SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18,
                               UNITED STATES CODE)

            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
Code), I, John W. Elias, Chief Executive Officer of Edge Petroleum Corporation,
a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), hereby certify, to my knowledge, that:

      (1)   the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
            March 31, 2004 (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: May 11, 2004                                  /s/ John W. Elias
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Name:      John W. Elias
                                                        Chief Executive Officer
#### William F. Tempel, appellant, v. Ferdinand L. Capps, appellee.

Gen. No. 28,391.

Judgment by confession on note. Judgment opened. New judgment for costs against plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. John J. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the second division of this court for the first district at the March term, 1923.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed October 2, 1923.

Einar C. Howard, for appellant. Henry Pollenz, for appellee.

Mr, Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.
Exhibit 99.36


          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 Communication, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald
A. Duncan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of
         the Company.


Date:  August 14, 2002                 /s/ Ronald A. Duncan
                                       Ronald A. Duncan
                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                       General Communication, Inc.




                                       1
<PAGE>
          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 Communication, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John M.
Lowber, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of
         the Company.



Date:  August 14, 2002                 /s/ John M. Lowber
                                       John M. Lowber
                                       Chief Financial Officer
                                       General Communication, Inc.




                                       2
### §1345. Effect on contracts

Nothing in this subchapter shall affect any obligation of the Corporation to carry out its transportation contracts and equipment leases, equipment trusts, and conditional sales agreements, in accordance with their terms.

(Pub. L. 99–509, title IV, §4037, Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1909.)
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-01-00327-CV

Francisco Murillo Gonzales, Appellant

v.

Intelecom, Inc., Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 200TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. GN002419, HONORABLE SUZANNE COVINGTON, JUDGE PRESIDING 

PER CURIAM

Appellant Francisco Murillo Gonzales, through his counsel of record, has informed

this Court that he is unable to further pursue his appeal, that he has instructed the district court clerk

that a clerk’s record should not be prepared, and that dismissal of his appeal is appropriate. We

construe appellant’s correspondence as a motion to dismiss and accordingly, dismiss the appeal. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2). 

Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: September 13, 2001

Do Not Publish
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON. D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

GOJET AIRLINES, LLC 

FAA Docket No. CP10CE0004 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0190 

Judge: Patrick G. Geraghty 

"3- 9 2010 

•JG POCKET 

en 

COMPLAINANT'S REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO 

RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

CO 

COMES NOW the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by counsel, and pursuant to 

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 13.218, files this reply in opposition to the 

Respondent's motion for summary judgment filed on July 30, 2010 (Respondent's motion). 

CFR § 13.218 (c) states that "a party shall file any prehearing motion, and shall serve a 

copy on each party, not later than 30 days before the hearing." The hearing on this matter is 

scheaduled for August 25, 2010. Respondent's motion was filed and served less than 30 days 

before the hearing, in violation of CFR § 13.218 (c), and therefore should be denied. 

Furthermore, in submitting a motion for summary judgment, the burden rests on the 

moving party to establish that no factual issues exist. CFR § 13.218(f)(5). In the instant case, 

Respondent's motion noted that "GoJet has denied each and every allegation." Thus, genuine 

issues of material fact exist and Respondent's motion should be denied. 

Dated this T^ day of August 2010 

Respectfiilly Submitted, 

A. Lester Haizlip 

Regional Counsel 

By: 

^J 

David Kessler 

Attorney 
IN THE MATTER OF GOJET AIRLINES, LLC. DMS No. FAA-2010-0190 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have this date provided the original and one copy of the Complainant's 

Reply in Opposition to Respondent's Motion to for Summary Judgment to the below named, via the 

United States mail, postage prepaid, on August 2, 2010, addressed to: 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

In addition, I hereby certify that I have this date provided a copy to the below named, via facsimile 

transmission, and placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid, on August 2, 2010, the original, 

addressed to: 

David Hayes 

11495 Natural Bridge Road 

Bridgeton, MO 63044 

(facsimile to (314) 222-4314) 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, ALJ 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

(facsimile to (202) 366-7536) 

David Kessler 

Attorney
CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report of Douglas Lake Minerals Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended May 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Harpreet S. Sangha, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his 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 result of operations of the Company.



|Date:  September 5, 2006 | /s/ Harpreet S. Sangha
Harpreet S. Sangha 
President and Chief Executive Officer
|------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Douglas Lake Minerals Inc. and will be retained by Douglas Lake Minerals Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]