alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
RB

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0304

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

WILLIAM EDDIE MOODY,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, and

good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to and

including November 2, 2021, within which to prepare, serve, and file its response 

brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

September 20 2021

09/20/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0304
427 A.2d 1219

#### Commonwealth v. Hinton, Appellant.

*621Argued September 12, 1979.

Charles A. Fitzpatrick, III, for appellant;

William E. Nugent, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before PRICE, WIEAND and VAN der VOORT, JJ.*

*

 Judge Donald E. Wieand is sitting by special designation.

Judgments of sentence affirmed.
Exhibit No. 32.1
Form 10-QSB
Universal Express, Inc.
File No. 0-18094



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Universal Express, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
Altomare, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company,
certify 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 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 5, 2006                        By:  /s/ Richard Altomare
                                              --------------------------
                                              Richard Altomare
                                              Chief Executive Officer and
                                              Chief Accounting Officer


This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
Exhibit 99.2


                            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 American Tax Credit Properties III
L.P. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Neal Ludeke, Chief Financial Officer of Richman Housing Credits
Inc., general partner of Richman Tax Credit Properties III L.P., general partner
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to
(S) 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.



/s/ Neal Ludeke
---------------------------
by: Neal Ludeke
Chief Financial Officer of Richman
Housing Credits Inc., general partner of
Richman Tax Credit Properties III L.P.,
general partner of the Company
February 13, 2003
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 Covalent Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenneth M. Borow, M.D., President and 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.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Kenneth M. Borow, M.D.           
|Kenneth M. Borow, M.D.               
|President and Chief Executive Officer



August 16, 2004



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes
 Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Download Page G.17 - Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization for Dec 16, 2013

Series Description Oil and gas extraction (NAICS = 211); n.s.a. IP Crude petroleum and natural gas extraction (NAICS = 211111); n.s.a. IP Natural gas liquid extraction (NAICS = 211112); n.s.a. IP

Unit: Index:_2007_100Index:_2007_100 Index:_2007_100

Multiplier: 1 1 1

Currency: NA NA NA

Unique Identifier: G17/IP_MINING_AND_UTILITY_DETAIL/IP.G211.A G17/IP_MINING_AND_UTILITY_DETAIL/IP.G211111.A G17/IP_MINING_AND_UTILITY_DETAIL/IP.G211112.A

Time Period IP.G211.A IP.G211111.AIP.G211112.A

2000 106.8964 106.7875 107.5036

2001 107.6944 107.8921 104.365

2002 105.4014 105.3959 104.6145

2003 104.1685 104.8369 95.439

2004 101.5607 101.5834 100.7621

2005 97.7165 97.8274 95.6827

2006 98.1185 98.1713 97.085

2007 100 100 100

2008 101.2158 101.2855 99.7662

2009 106.3439 106.3192 106.9198

2010 109.686 109.3595 116.5982

2011 115.5674 115.1585 124.1946

2012 126.6845 126.3745 132.9662
r Dec 16, 2013

12); n.s.a. IP
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 151 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 151

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1996, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 1996

Mr. Obey introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Appropriations

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1996, and 
                          for other purposes.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That section 106(c) of Public 
Law 104-56 (109 Stat. 280) is amended by inserting at the end of such 
section ``except that the terms of this resolution shall be extended 
through January 12, 1996, for activities for which funding would be 
available under the appropriations Act for the Departments of Labor, 
Health and Human Services and Education and Related Agencies for 
1996''.
                                 <all>
```
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent, <br><br>against<br><br>Jareyid Alibeyah, Defendant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Diana M. Boyar, J.), rendered April 2, 2013, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and imposing sentence.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Judgment of conviction (Diana M. Boyar, J.), rendered April 2, 2013, affirmed.</p><p>Defendant's guilty plea was knowing, intelligent and voluntary. At the plea proceeding, defendant stated that he wanted to plead guilty to criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree (<i>see</i> Penal Law ยง 165.40), admitted that he was, in fact, guilty of possessing property, including an iPhone and driver's license, that he did not have permission or authority from the owner to possess, and stated that he understood that by pleading guilty he was giving up his right to trial, the right to have the prosecution prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the right to present a defense. Manifestly, this case does not involve the type of "silent record" which is insufficient to "overcome the presumption against waiver by a defendant of constitutionally guaranteed protections<i>" </i>(<i>People v Tyrell</i>,22 NY3d 359, 365 [2013], citing <i>People v Harris</i>, 61 NY2d 9, 17 [1983]<i>; see People v Conceicao</i>, 26 NY3d 375 [2015]; <i>People v Sougou</i>, 26 NY3d 1052 [2015]). To the contrary, the plea record, taken as a whole, amply shows that defendant intelligently and understandingly waived his constitutional rights (<i>People v Sougou</i>, 26 NY3d at 1055).</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: March 16, 2016<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20

- 1941

JESUS VASQUEZ, JR.; PENNEY LEIGH VASQUEZ , Debtors

- Appellants ,

v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, as Trustee of Stanwich Mortgage Trust F , Creditor

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Wilmington

. James C. Dever III, District Judge. ( 7:20

- cv
- 00062

- D )

Submitted : April 27, 2021 Decided: April 30, 2021

Before KEENAN, WYNN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Richard P

. Cook , RICHARD P. COOK, PLLC , Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellants. Philip T. Evans , HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP , Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jesus Vasquez, Jr. , and Penney Leigh Vasquez appeal the di strict court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order granting Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB’s motion to dismiss the adversary proceeding filed by the Vasquezes in their Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding. We have reviewed the record included on appeal and find no error below. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Vasquez v. Wilmington Savings Fund Soc ’y , FSB , No. 7:20

- cv
- 00062

- D (E.D.N.C. Aug. 27, 2020) ;

s ee Dewsnup v. Timm , 502 U.S. 410 (1992). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Checklist use by Front Door Photo's is recomemded by DJI for the 

Phantom 2 and the Inspire 1.

Preflight Checklist for the DJI Phantom 2 Vision:

Preflight Checklist

1) Remote Controller, smart battery, Range Extender, and smartphone are fully charged.

2) Propellers are mounted correctly.

3) Gimbal clamp has been removed.

4) Damping absorbers are in good condition, not broken, or worn.

5) Anti-Drop kits have been mounted correctly.

6) Camera lens cap has been removed.

7) Micro-SD card has been inserted if necessary.

8) Gimbal is functioning as normal.

9) Motors can start and are functioning as normal

10) DJI VISION App can connect to the camera.

Preflight Checklist for the Inspire 1:

Preflight Checklist

1) Check that all parts are in good condition. Do not fly with aging or damaged parts.

2) Remote controller, intelligent Flight Battery and mobile device are all fully charged.

3) Propellers are mounted correctly and secure.

4) Lens is clear.

5) Micro-SD card has been inserted, it necessary.

6) Gimbal is functioning as normal.

7) Gimbal is correctly attached to the aircraft.

8) Motors can start and are functioning as normal.

9) The DJI Pilot app can connect to the camera and all firmware has been updated to the 

latest version.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nortira PETITFRERE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-4918.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 23, 2002.

Decided June 21, 2002.

Lionel S. Lofton, Lofton & Lofton, P.C., Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Sean Kittrell, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before TRAXLER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Nortira Petitfrere pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy in violation of 21 U.S.CA. § 846 (West 1999 and Supp.2001). The district court sentenced him to 97 months imprisonment. On appeal, Petitfrere argues his sentencing was flawed in four respects. He first claims the court erred in enhancing his offense level under *U.S. Sentencing Guideline*§ 3C1.1 for obstruction of justice. We review a district court’s finding of fact that a defendant engaged in conduct that obstructed justice for clear error. *See United States v. Self,*132 F.3d 1039, 1041 (4th Cir.1997). We find that the court correctly concluded that Petitfrere made false statements that obstructed the investigation of the scope of his own relevant conduct as well as obstructing the investigation of other potential co-conspirators.

Next, Petitfrere objects to the court’s refusal to lower his offense level for acceptance of responsibility. We review the district court’s determination that a defendant does not warrant credit for accep*696tance of responsibility for clear error. *See United States v. White,*875 F.2d 427, 431 (4th Cir.1989). Given the finding that Petitfrere obstructed justice by refusing to admit to the entire extent of his relevant conduct, we find the district court did not clearly err in refusing to lower Petitfrere’s offense level of acceptance of responsibility

Petitfrere also challenges the court’s enhancement of his offense level under USSG § 2Dl.l(b)(l) based on his possession of a firearm during his offense. A finding that a defendant’s offense level should be increased under USSG § 2Dl.l(b)(l) is reviewed for clear error. *See United States v. McAllister,*272 F.3d 228, 234 (4th Cir.2001). We find the district court correctly determined that it was not “clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the offense.” USSG § 2Dl.l(b)(l), comment, (n.3).

Finally, Petitfrere claims he should have received a sentence reduction under the “safety valve” provision of USSG § 5C1.2. Based on our rulings above, we find that Petitfrere does not meet the criteria necessary to warrant a sentence reduction under § 5G1.2.

Accordingly we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
S I 0-1003 1 1-00 7

CINCINNATI/NORTHER N KENTUCK Y INTERNATIONA L AIRPOR T P.O . BO X 75200 0 CINCINNATI . O H 45275-200 0 {859)767-315 1 FA X (859 ) 767-308 0

March 5 . 201 0 Th e Honorabl e Raymon dH . LaHoo d Secretar y U.S . Department

o f Transportatio n 1200 New Jerse y Ave , S E Washington , D C 2059 0 Docket DOT-OST-2010-003 4 Dea r Mr . Secretary : Than k yo u fo r th e opportunity to expres s ou r suppor t fo r th e applicatio n fo

r antitrus t i^rtimunit y andpropose djoin t

busines s agreement

filedb y American Airline s an dJapa n Airlines . Th e propose dallianc e betwee n thes e tw o airline s i s vita l fo r oneworl dt

o compete effectively . Thi s increase dinterallianc e competitio n wil l i n tur n enhanc e th e benefit s o f

th e Department' s Ope n Skie s polic y - first b y solidifyin g U.S.-Japan Ope n Skies , then b y servin g a s afoundatio n fo r furthe r liberalizatio n acros s Asia . Afte r athoroug h review , w e encourag e th e Departmen t o f Transportatio n t o approv e thi s applicatio n a s i

t woul denabl e thes e oneworl dallianc e airline s t o wor k closel y togethe r

t o deliver highl y competitiv e ai r

transportatio n services . Approval fo r AA/JA L allianc e wil l hav e apositiv e impac t

o n ai r trave l b y offerin g customer s mor e service , schedulin g an d pricin g option s andwil l hel p t o ensure tha t customer s continu e t o benefi t fi-omhavin g competitiv e ai r

alliance s to choos e from . I urg e yo u t o quickl y approv e thi s application . Sincerely , John C . Mok Chie f Executiv e Office

r Kento n Count

y Airpor t Boar d
#### The People of the State of New York *against*Wilhelmina Williams.

(Decided April 7th, 1879.)

A married woman cannot bind herself as surety on a recognizance (entered into by her without any benefit arising therefrom to her separate estate; conditioned that the principal therein will appear at a Court of General Sessions to answer any indictment that may be found against him ; at least where she does not in the recognizance bind her separate estate for the performance thereof.

Application to vacate a forfeited recognizance.

One William Porter was charged before a police justice of the city of New York with having committed a burglary, and was held to bail in the sum of $4000 to appear at the Court of General Sessions and answer any indictment that might be found against him, and gave a recognizance therefor, with the applicant, Wilhelmina Williams, as surety. The recognizance was forfeited, and the surety applied to the general term to have the judgment entered thereon vacated, on the ground that at the time of signing it she was a married woman. The court ordered a reference to take proof as to whether the applicant was a married woman at the time she became bail, and also upon what, if any, pledge, indemnity, promise, or consideration, she entered into such surety-ship.

The "referee reported that the applicant was a married woman at the time she became bail, and that she entered *265into such suretyship upon no pledge, indemnity, or other promise.

*Michael E. G-oodheart,*for the applicant.

*Benjamin K. Phelps,*district attorney, for the people.

Charles P. Daly, Chief Justice.

The judgment on the recognizance in this case must be discharged. The plaintiff, who gave the recognizance, was at the time of giving it a married woman. Her marriage was proved before the referee by the clergyman who celebrated it, and it is well settled that a married woman cannot be bound by a recognizance,' because it is not capable of being estreated. *(Bennet*v. *Wilson,*3 M. & Selw. p. 1, per Le Blanc, J.; Petersdorf on Bail, 506.) Or, if capable, under the enabling acts, to enter into a recognizance as surety, she can only bind her separate estate, and that she does so must be expressed in the instrument. (Go*sman*v. *Crugie,*69 N. Y. 87.)

Van Hoesen, J., concurred.

Judgment vacatéd.
Executive Compensation Summary



 Exhibit 10.30 
 Executive Officer Summary Compensation Sheet 
 Annual Cash Compensation for Senior
Executive Officers 
 The annual cash compensation for Executive Officers of Rackable Systems, Inc. as of January 1, 2007, was as
follows: 
  

							
	 Executive Officer
	  	Annual
Base
Salary ($)	  	Annual
Target
Bonus ($)
	 Thomas K. Barton
         Chief Executive Officer
	  	$	400,000	  	$	280,000
			
	 Todd R. Ford
         President
	  	 	350,000	  	 	210,000
			
	 Giovanni Coglitore
         Founder and Chief Technology Officer
	  	 	250,000	  	 	100,000
			
	 William P. Garvey
         General Counsel, Vice President of Corporate Development and
Secretary
	  	 	238,000	  	 	95,000
			
	 Madhu Ranganathan
         Chief Financial Officer
	  	 	263,000	  	 	105,000

 Cash Bonus Arrangements for Executive Officers: 
  

	1.	20% of the Annual Target Bonus maybe earned each quarter and 20% may be earned at year end. The bonus awards are determined based upon Rackable Systems’ achievement of certain
performance goals to be established by the Compensation Committee of the Board.
#### § 31.0-4 Extent to which the regulations in this part supersede prior regulations.

The regulations in this part, with respect to the subject matter within the scope thereof, supersede 25 CFR (1939) Parts 403, 406, 408, and 411 (Regulations 107, 120, 128, and 114, respectively). The Regulation on Monthly Returns and Payment of Employment Taxes (23 FR 5006) are also superseded.
#### Sampson Tkaczyk et al. *v.*Herman Levine, Administrator (Estate of Olga Gallagher), et al.

*Sampson Thaczyk*and *Evelyn Tkaczyk,*pro se, in support of the motions.

Submitted December 26, 1963

decided January 21, 1964

The motion by the plaintiffs for an order authorizing the Superior Court in New Haven County to issue an injunctive writ is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The motion by the plaintiffs for action under Canon 11 of Judicial Ethics is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.