alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
162 So. 771

#### OFFICER et al. v. AMERICAN INS. CO.

No. 33464.

July 1, 1935.

*1055See, also, Officer v. American Eagle Fire Ins. Co., 139 So. 719.

Frank E. Powell and Elmer L. Stewart, both of DeRidder, for appellants.

St. Clair Adams & Son, of New Orleans, and Pujo, Bell & Hardin, of Lake Charles, for appellee.

O’NIELL, Chief Justice.

The defendant, appellee, has moved to dismiss this appeal because the appellee was not served with a citation to appear in the appellate court. The appeal was taken by motion in open court, but during a term subsequent to the term in which the judgment was rendered and signed. A citation to answer the appeal was not asked for by the ap'pellant, or issued by the clerk of court.

The only instance in which a citation is not essential to the validity of an appeal is when the appeal is taken by motion in open court during the same term in which the judgment is rendered. Code of Practice, arts. 573, 574, 581-583. Under authority of section 1907 of the Revised Statutes, an appellate court will not dismiss an appeal for want of citation to answer the appeal, but will grant further time for service of a citation upon the appellee, if the failure to cite the appellee was due to negligence on the part of an officer of the court. Hiller v. Barrow, 144 La. 282, 80 So. 538; Taylor v. Allen, 151 La. 82, 91 So. 635; Toca v. Rojas, 152 La. 317, 93 So. 108. But the clerk of court is not obliged to issue a citation to the appellee when an appeal is taken by motion in open court, unless the appellant asks for service of citation upon the appellee. When an appeal has been taken by motion in open court, during a term subsequent to the term in which the judgment was rendered, and no citation to appear in the appellate court was asked for or issued, a motion to dismiss the appeal must prevail. De St. Romes v. Macarty, 21 La. Ann. 277; Wheeler & Pierson v. Peterkin, 38 La. Ann. 663; Smith v. O’Reilly Elevator Co., 134 La. 635, 64 So. 494; King v. First Methodist Church, 137 La. 879, 69 So. 593; State v. Salmen Brick *&*Lumber Co,, 149 La. 968, 90 So. 273; Palmisano & Palmisano v. Bonner, 167 La. 1014, 120 So. 630; Bass v. Lane, 169 La. 681, 125 So. 853; Jacobsen v. McGarry, 178 La. 79, 150 So. 838.

Act No. 234 of 1932, providing against the dismissal of an appeal because of an informality or irregularity in bringing up the record, or for some technical error, does not save an appeal from dismissal for want of citation, if the appeal was *1057taken by motion in open court during a term subsequent to the term in which the judgment was rendered and no citation was asked for or issued. Jacobsen v. McGarry, 178 La. 79, 150 So. 838.

The appeal is dismissed.
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC, Patent 

Litigation 

 Case No. 1:11-cv-09308 

Judge James F. Holderman 

Magistrate Judge Sidney Schenkier This Document Relates To: 

1:12-cv-03856 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 

On this day, Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC, Innovatio Management, LLC and Noel 

B. Whitley (collectively, “Innovatio”) and Barnes & Noble, Inc. announced to the Court 

that they have settled their respective claims for relief asserted in the above-captioned 

actions. The Court, having considered this request, is of the opinion that their request for 

dismissal should be GRANTED. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that all claims and counterclaims by Innovatio 

against Defendant and by Defendant against Innovatio in the above-captioned actions, 

including Case Nos. 1:11-cv-09308 (consolidated) and 1:12-cv-03856, are dismissed, 

with prejudice to the re-filing of same. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all attorneys’ fees, costs of court and expenses 

shall be borne by the party incurring the same. 

This is a final judgment. 

5/15/14 

_________________________________ 

James F. Holderman 

United States District Judge 

Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 1101 Filed: 05/15/14 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:47812
#### 19.502-7 Inclusion of Federal Prison Industries, Inc.

When using competitive procedures in accordance with 8.602(a)(4), agencies shall include Federal Prison Industries, Inc. (FPI), in the solicitation process and consider a timely offer from FPI.

[69 FR 16150, Mar. 26, 2004, as amended at 71 FR 223, Jan. 3, 2006. Redesignated at 85 FR 11762, Feb. 27, 2020]
1819.7202 Eligibility. ( a ) To be eligible as a mentor, an entity must be— ( 1 ) A large business prime contractor or research institution performing with at least one approved subcontracting plan (other than a commercial plan) negotiated with NASA, pursuant to FAR subpart 19.7. A contractor may apply to become a mentor if they currently are not performing under a NASA contract, as long as they are currently performing another Federal agency contract with an approved subcontracting plan. However, the NASA MPA will not be approved until the mentor company is performing under a NASA contract with an approved subcontracting plan.
( 2 ) Eligible for receipt of Government contracts. An entity will not be approved for participation in the program if, at the time of submission of the application to the NASA Mentor Protégé Program Office (MPPO), the entity is debarred or suspended from contracting with the Federal Government pursuant to FAR subpart 9.4.
( b ) To be eligible to participate as a protégé, an entity must be eligible for award of Federal contracts in accordance with FAR subpart 9.4, *i.e.,* entities cannot be suspended or debarred at the time of application for the program and must be classified as one of more of the following entities or socio-economic categories as defined by FAR part 2: ( 1 ) Small disadvantaged business;
( 2 ) Women-owned small or economically disadvantaged women-owned concern;
( 3 ) Veteran-owned or service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern;
( 4 ) Historically underutilized business zone concern;
( 5 ) Historically Black College and University or Minority-Serving Institution;
( 6 ) Current NASA Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Phase II Company; or
( 7 ) An entity participating in the AbilityOne Program.
( c ) A protégé firm may self-certify to a mentor firm that it meets the requirements set forth in paragraph (b) of this section. Mentors may rely in good faith on written representations by potential protégés that they meet the specified eligibility requirements.
[88 FR 69885, Oct. 10, 2023]
Exhibit 32

Certification of Trust Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 (the Report) of Kiewit Royalty Trust (the Trust), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Luke H. Paladino, the Trust Officer
of U.S. Bank National Association, the trustee of the Trust, certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

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

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



|                                    |  |     |  |                                           
|----------------------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------
|Dated this 25th day of March, 2010. |  | By: |  | /s/ Luke H. Paladino                      
|                                    |  |     |  | Luke H. Paladino, Trust Officer           
|                                    |  |     |  | U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee
2014.201-670 Solicitation provisions. ( a ) The contracting officer may insert the provision at 2052.214-70, Prebid Conference, in Invitations for Bids (IFB) where there will be a prebid conference. This provision may be altered by the contracting officer to fit the circumstances of the procurement.
( b ) The contracting officer may insert the provision at 2052.214-71, Bidder Qualifications and Past Experience in IFBs on an optional basis to fit the circumstances of the requirement;
( c ) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 2052.214-72 Bid Evaluation in all IFBs. Paragraph (f) of this provision is optional.
( d ) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 2052.214-73 Timely Receipt of Bids in all IFBs.
( e ) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 2052.214-74 Disposition of Bids in all IFBs.
#### 1852.223-76 Federal Automotive Statistical Tool Reporting.

As prescribed at 1823.271 and 1851.205, insert the following clause:

# Federal Automotive Statistical Tool Reporting (JUL 2003)

If authorized to operate Government-owned or -leased vehicles, including interagency fleet management system (IFMS) vehicles or related services in performance of this contract, the Contractor shall report the data describing vehicle usage required by the Federal Automotive Statistical Tool (FAST) by October 15 of each year. FAST is accessed through *https://fastweb.inel.gov/ .*

(End of clause)

[68 FR 43334, July 22, 2003, as amended at 80 FR 50212, Aug. 19, 2015]
19.1309 Contract clauses. ( a ) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.219-3, Notice of HUBZone Set-Aside or Sole-Source Award, in solicitations and contracts for acquisitions that are set aside or awarded on a sole-source basis to, HUBZone small business concerns under 19.1305 or 19.1306. This includes multiple-award contracts when orders may be set aside for HUBZone small business concerns as described in 8.405-5 and 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F) or when orders may be issued directly to one HUBZone small business concern in accordance with 19.504(c)(1)(ii).
( b ) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.219-4, Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone Small Business Concerns, in solicitations and contracts for acquisitions conducted using full and open competition.
( c ) For use of clause 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, see the prescription at 19.507(e).
( d ) For use of clause 52.219-33, Nonmanufacturer Rule, see the prescription at 19.507(h).
[86 FR 44243, Aug. 11, 2021]
#### DuBose *v.*Bank of Sparta *et al.*

December 11, 1912.

Complaint. Before Judge J. B. Park. Hancock superior court. March 28, 1912.

*B. E. Lewis,*for plaintiff. *B. L. Merritt,*for defendants.

Lumpkin, J.

1. Where a bill of exceptions recited the filing of a petition, the making of an amendment thereto, the filing of a demurrer, the sustaining of it, and the dismissal of the case, “which was error,” this was a sufficient assignment of error to withstand a motion to dismiss the writ of error.

2. The petition set out no cause of action, and there was no error in sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the case.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices*concur.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Eugene Rambam, Appellant. Martin P. Catherwood, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

Memorandum by the court. This is an appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment as a drill press operator without good cause. That his resignation was voluntary the claimant concedes. In his original interview an existing company policy prohibiting overtime work which eliminated the opportunity to increase his fixed weekly wage of $75 was ascribed as the motivation for his quit. At the hearing before the Referee he added the factors of alleged excessive travel distance and the cost of reaching the employment as bases for his departure. When he took the job two months earlier claimant was aware of the conditions and circumstances upon which he later relied to justify his voluntary separation from employment. Since nothing developed in the course of the employment which would have justified its refusal in the first place, reliance on the exception contained in the Unemployment Insurance Law (Labor Law, art. 18, § 593, subd. 1, par. [a]) is misplaced. *(Matter of Sellers*[J. *W. Mays, Inc.],*13 A D 2d 204; *Matter of Malnic*[Catherwood], 20 A D 2d 583.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Hamm, JJ., concur.
A-xxm DXXERAL

Honorable James E. Kilday, Director Xotor Transportation Division Rsllroad Commissionof Texas Austin, Texas
Dear Sirs OpinionNo. O-2310 Re: Whether Railroad Commission should collect lO$ of total considerationfor lease of certificate at ii?6

inception, or on monthly payments as they are made.
In your letter of April 29,,1!3&0, you advise that the Rallroad Commissionhas just approvedan applicationto lease a cergificate of convenienceand necessity for a period of five years from April 1, 1940, the applicat+onahowIng the coneideratlon to be Sixty (qi60.00) Dollars per month rental. You request our opinion as to whe&her.ornot, in collectingthe ten (lC$)per cent highway fee required td be paid in ic Section of Article glib, Vernon's Civil Statutes you should collect ,ten (10s per sent: of' Three Thousand Six Hundred (ji3,600,00) Dollars ln one sum, the considerationfor the full term of the lease,, or tahether

- you should collect.justten (10%)per chnt of,tha Sixty (460.00)'Dollar monthly rental as (itla paid.

In s&ion 5 of Article glib,Vernon's Civil Statutes latlng to common aarriermotor carrler0, it is provided that "in c&z", certificateis transferred,that the transfereeshall pay to the Cpmmiaslon a sum of'

money equal to ten (10s)per cent of the amount paid as a conalderatlon for the transfer of the certificate." In our Opinion No. O-1505,- it was held that this provisionappllea to the lease of aertfflcates of convenience

and necessity. It Is noted that under the terms of the statute,the ten (10s)per cent required to be oollected ia upon the amounta, not t$n (10s) per cent of the amount agreed to be paid. If the full ten (10s)per cent of the consideration provided to be paid over the full period should be collected in advance, and ,Ifthe lease should be terminatedby either or both of the parties before the end of the lease period, and the monthly payments cease, the State would have collectedmore than ten (10s)per oent of the amount paid a8 a consideration for the lease. We do not believe the statute waa meant to make possible such a situationas fha,t. In our opinion, said ten (10%)per cent should be collectedonly as the monthly lease payments mre made.
Yours very truly
ATTORNH GEZ?EMLOF~S GRLrRS:wc By s/ Glenn R. Lewis Glenn R. Lewis Assistant AttorneyGeneral of Texas

= .-._._,^^

?4..-4 .!-+a- mr RWR Chairman
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

SANTONY MARQUES GADSDEN, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-1118

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed March 20, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee 

County; Mark A. Steinbeck, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, 

and Richard Sanders, Assistant Public 

Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

LaROSE, C.J., and MORRIS and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
1835.016-70 Foreign participation under broad agency announcements (BAAs). ( a ) *Policy.* ( 1 ) NASA seeks the broadest participation in response to broad agency announcements, including foreign proposals or proposals including foreign participation. NASA's policy is to conduct research with foreign entities on a cooperative, no-exchange-of-funds basis (see NPD 1360.2, Initiation and Development of International Cooperation in Space and Aeronautics Programs). NASA does not normally fund foreign research proposals or foreign research efforts that are part of U.S. research proposals. Rather, cooperative research efforts are implemented via international agreements between NASA and the sponsoring foreign agency or funding/sponsoring institution under which the parties agree to each bear the cost of discharging their respective responsibilities.
( 2 ) In accordance with the National Space Transportation Policy, use of a non-U.S. manufactured launch vehicle is permitted only on a no-exchange-of-funds basis.
( 3 ) NASA funding may not be used for subcontracted foreign research efforts. The direct purchase of supplies and/or services, which do not constitute research, from non-U.S. sources by U.S. award recipients is permitted.
[64 FR 48561, Sept. 7, 1999, as amended at 69 FR 35272, June 24, 2004]
#### 1852.236-71 Additive or deductive items.

As prescribed in 1836.570(a), insert the following provision:

# Additive or Deductive Items (MAR 1989)

(a) The low bidder for purposes of award shall be the conforming responsible bidder offering the low aggregate amount for the first or base bid item, plus or minus (in order of priority listed in the Schedule) those additive or deductive bid items providing the most features of the work within the funds determined by the Government to be available before bids are opened. If addition of another bid item in the listed order of priority would make the award exceed those funds for all bidders, it shall be skipped and the next subsequent additive bid item in a lower amount shall be added for each bid if award on it can be made within the funds.

(b) An example for one bid is an amount available of $100,000, a bidder's base bid of $85,000, and four successive additives of $10,000, $8,000, $6,000, and $4,000. In this example, the aggregate amount of the bid for purposes of award would be $99,000 for the base bid plus the first and fourth additives, the second and third additives being skipped because either of them would cause the aggregate bid to exceed $100,000.

(c) All bids shall be evaluated on the basis of the same additive or deductive bid items. The listed order of priority must be followed only for determining the low bidder. After determination of the low bidder, award in the best interests of the Government may be made to that bidder on its base bid and any combination of its additive or deductive bid items for which funds are determined to be available at the time of the award, provided that award of the combination of bid items does not exceed the amount offered by any other conforming responsible bidder for the same combination of bid items.

(End of provision)

[54 FR 28340, July 5, 1989, as amended at 62 FR 4476, Jan. 30, 1997]
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 48 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 48

Directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make corrections 
                    in the enrollment of H.R. 1551.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 2018

  Mr. Hatch (for himself and Mr. Whitehouse) submitted the following 
       concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make corrections 
                    in the enrollment of H.R. 1551.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That, in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 1551, the Clerk of the House 
of Representatives shall make the following corrections:
            (1) Amend the long title so as to read: ``An Act to 
        modernize copyright law, and for other purposes.''.
            (2) In section 1(a), strike ``Orrin G. Hatch'' and insert 
        ``Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte''.
                                 <all>
```
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 Amended Annual Report of Global Health Voyager, Inc. (the
"Registrant") on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ali Moussavi, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant,
certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 and 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 Registrant.




Date: October 19, 2011





By: /s/ Ali Moussavi


Ali Moussavi,


Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.0.3

Eastern Division

MWF Foundation, Inc.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−02208

Honorable Virginia M. Kendall

Daniel Dragan, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, December 3, 2012:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Status hearing held on

12/3/2012. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice(tsa, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-02208 Document #: 27 Filed: 12/03/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:103
#### 2052.214-74 Disposition of bids.

As prescribed at 2014.670(b), the contracting officer shall insert the following provision in applicable invitation for bids:

# Disposition of Bids (JAN 1993)

After award of the contract, one copy of each unsuccessful bid will be retained by the NRC's Division of Contracts and Property Management in accordance with the General Records Schedule 3(5)(b). Unless return of the additional copies of the bid is requested by the bidder upon submission of the bid, all other copies will be destroyed. This request should appear in a cover letter accompanying the bid.

(End of provision)
EXHIBIT 3.6
 CERTIFICATES OF DESIGNATIONS,
PREFERENCES, POWERS AND RIGHTS
OF
SERIES 2006C PREFERRED STOCK
OF
AXCESS INTERNATIONAL INC.
 AXCESS INTERNATIONAL INC. Company
 RESOLVED
 Section 1. Designation and Amount Original Issue Price
 Section 2. Rank Senior Securities Common Stock Junior Securities Parity Securities Distributions
 Section 3. Dividends and Distribution




---



##### 



Section 4. Liquidation Preference
 Liquidation Preference
  Section 5. Conversion Conversion Rights
 Right to Convert
 Mechanics of Conversion
 Reservation of Stock Issuable Upon Conversion




---



##### 



Adjustment to Conversion Price
 Adjustment to Conversion Price Due to Stock Split Dividend, Etc.
 Adjustment Due to Merger, Consolidation, Etc.
 Section 6. Voting
 Section 7. Optional Redemption by Company




---



##### 



Section 8. Mandatory Conversion by Company
 Section 9. Status of Converted or Redeemed Stock
 Section 10. Other Preferred Stock
 Section 11. Lost or Stolen Certificates
 Section 12. Fractional Shares
 Section 13. Preemptive Rights
#### Nasworthy *v.*The State.

January 14, 1913.

Indictment for murder. Before Judge Bawlings. Jenkins superior court. October 28, 1912.

*A. 8. Anderson,*for plaintiff in error.

*T. 8. Felder, attorney-general, Alfred Herrington, solicitor-general,*and *Hines & Jordan,*contra.

Atkinson, J.

There being no assignment of error upon any ruling of law, and the evidence being sufficient to support the verdict, the discretion of the trial judge in refusing a new trial will not be disturbed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*