alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 Case Number: 14-cr-20715 

 v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington 

JESSIE COOK, 

 Defendant. 

_______________________________________/ 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, ACCEPTING 

DEFENDANT’S PLEA OF GUILTY, AND TAKING THE RULE 11 PLEA 

AGREEMENT UNDER ADVISEMENT 

On March 9, 2015, United States Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris conducted a plea 

hearing pursuant to Defendant’s consent. The Magistrate Judge issued her report on March 9, 

2015, recommending that this Court accept Defendant’s plea of guilty. 

Although the Magistrate Judge’s report explicitly stated that the parties to this action may 

object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report, 

neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed any objections. The election not to file objections to the 

Magistrate Judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record. 

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The failure to file objections to the report and 

recommendation waives any further right to appeal. 

 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, 

ECF No. 16, is ADOPTED. 

 It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s plea of guilty is ACCEPTED, and the Rule 11 

Plea Agreement, ECF No. 15, is taken UNDER ADVISEMENT. 

Dated: April 7, 2015 s/Thomas L. Ludington 

 THOMAS L. LUDINGTON 

 United States District Judge 

1:14-cr-20715-TLL-PTM Doc # 19 Filed 04/07/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 96
PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served 

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first 

class U.S. mail on April 7, 2015. 

 s/Karri Sandusky 

 Karri Sandusky, acting Case Manager 

1:14-cr-20715-TLL-PTM Doc # 19 Filed 04/07/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 97
#### Naomi S. Harris, *Executrix, etc.,*and Naomi S. Harris, *Respondents, v*. Horace Hiscock, *Appellant*.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Osborn, J.
#### § 115.2-115.99 [Reserved]
###### Editorial Note on Part 154

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 154.1105 Exterior water spray system: General.

Each liquefied flammable gas vessel and each liquefied toxic gas vessel must have an exterior water spray system that meets §§ 154.1110 through 154.1135.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 07, 2024.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, February 07, 2024

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A24A0812. BILLY W. BROMELL v. THEODORE JAMES SMOLENSKI.

The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this

Court and with Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration of errors

and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals Rule 13.

On January 29, 2024, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors

and a brief no later than February 06, 2024. As of the date of this order, the appellant's

enumeration of errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed

abandoned and is hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a).
# C_2011311EN.01002101.xml

| 22.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 311/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 311/21

---

Appeal brought on 10 August 2011 by the Council of the European Union against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber, extended composition) delivered on 8 June 2011 in Case T-86/11 Bamba v Council

(Case C-417/11 P)

2011/C 311/35

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop, B. Driessen and E. Dumitriu-Segnana, Agents)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Nadiany Bamba, European Commission

Other parties to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The Council claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment delivered on 8 June 2011 by the General Court (Fifth Chamber, extended composition) in Case T-86/11 Bamba v Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment delivered on 8 June 2011 by the General Court (Fifth Chamber, extended composition) in Case T-86/11 Bamba v Council;

Bamba

Council

| — | give final judgment in the matters that are the subject of the present appeal and dismiss the application by Ms Nadiany Bamba as unfounded; and |
| --- | --- |

—

give final judgment in the matters that are the subject of the present appeal and dismiss the application by Ms Nadiany Bamba as unfounded; and

| — | order Ms Nadiany Bamba to pay the costs incurred by the Council at first instance and in connection with the present appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Ms Nadiany Bamba to pay the costs incurred by the Council at first instance and in connection with the present appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Council puts forward two pleas in law in support of its appeal.

The appellant’s main plea is that the reasoning provided in the contested measures meets the requirements of Article 296 TFEU and, consequently, the General Court erred in law in ruling that the contested measures are vitiated by an inadequate statement of reasons. The Council provided in the recitals in the preambles to the contested measures a detailed description of the particularly serious situation in Côte d’Ivoire which justified the measures taken against certain persons and entities. Moreover, the Council clearly stated the reasons why it considers that Ms Nadiany Bamba should be subject to the restrictive measures concerned.

In the alternative, the Council claims that the General Court erred in law in failing to take into account, in its assessment of whether the obligation to state reasons had been complied with, the context, which is well known to Ms Nadiany Bamba, in which the contested measures were adopted.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001006282
<NAME>                        PICK COMMUNICATIONS CORP.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               501,675
<PP&E>                                       4,649,497
<DEPRECIATION>                                 214,527
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,266,835
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       17,613,662
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        6,531,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        89,234
<OTHER-SE>                                (30,120,417)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,266,835
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,824,845
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,751,036)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,751,036)
<DISCONTINUED>                            (51,966,986)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (56,718,022)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (17.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 154

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 154.453 Failure to meet independent tank type C standards.

If the Commandant (CG-ENG) determines during plan review, that a tank designed as an independent tank type C fails to meet the standards under § 154.450, § 154.451, and 154.452 and cannot be redesigned to meet those standards, the tank may be redesigned as an independent tank type A or B.

[CGD 74-289, 44 FR 26009, May 3, 1979, as amended by CGD 82-063b, 48 FR 4782, Feb. 3, 1983; USCG-2014-0688, 79 FR 58284, Sept. 29, 2014]
EX-31.01

CERTIFICATION

I, Harry Masuda, certify that:

1.      I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Human
BioSystems;

2.      Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3.      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4.      The registrant's other certifying officers 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)] for the registrant and we have:

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 quarterly report is
being prepared;


b.      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 quarterly report based on such evaluation; and

c.      disclosed in this quarterly 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 forth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting;

5.      The registrant's other certifying officers 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 function):

a.      All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b.      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls
over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2005


/s/ Harry Masuda
------------------
Harry Masuda
Chief Executive Officer and
Acting Chief Financial Officer
|EXHIBIT 32.2
|------------



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

The undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief Financial Officer of Belcrest Capital Fund LLC (the Fund), that based on his knowledge:

|(a) | the Quarterly Report of the Fund on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|(b) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the Fund for such period.                                        
|   



|Date: May 9, 2008
|-----------------



| | /s/Andrew C. Frenette
Andrew C. Frenette
Chief Financial Officer
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Docket No. FAA· ZOIO-/2 72

Record of Ex Parte Cdntacts

.2010 -A/M- 2.'2.'-' -AD

Directorate Identifier: ·AD

I

With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been dischssed (i.e., Design Approval Holder,

manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALP A, GAMX. ete)? (You might need to submit a separate

record to the Rules Dockel. The AD Manual defines "Ex Parte Co~tacts. '') '.-

I

ORGANIZA nON PERSON CONTACTED I DATE RESPONSE

ATA Mr. Joe White 09·20·2010 Other. List below.

,

I

Other! Additional Information: TBD
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT**I, Charles D. Johnston, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-KSB of QualMark Corporation (the“small business issuer”);  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statements of materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;  4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;b) [Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transition instructions contained in SEC release34-47986.]c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report basedon such evaluation; andd) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the smallbusiness issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent function):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the smallbusiness issuer’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 asignificant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: March 30, 2007                                                                              /s/ Charles D. Johnston   Charles D. Johnston   President & Chief Executive
November 25 2009
§ 113.35-7 Electric engine order telegraph systems; operations. ( a ) Where two or more transmitters, located on or on top of, or on the wings of, the navigating bridge operate a common indicator in the engineroom, the transmitters must: ( 1 ) Operate in synchronism as required in paragraph (b) of this section; or
( 2 ) Operate under the control of a transmitter transfer control in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) All transmitter handles and pointers must operate in synchronism. Where the transmitters are mechanically interlocked to effect synchronous operation, the requirements of § 113.35-13 must be met.
( c ) Except for a transmitter in an unattended navigating bridge on a double-ended vessel, each transmitter must operate under the control of a transmitter transfer control so that movement of any one transmitter handle automatically connects that transmitter electrically to the engineroom indicator and simultaneously disconnects electrically all other transmitters. The reply pointers of all transmitters must operate in synchronism at all times.
( d ) On a double-ended vessel that has two navigating bridges, a manually operated transfer switch which will disconnect the system in the unattended navigating bridge must be provided.
[CGD 74-125A, 47 FR 15272, Apr. 8, 1982. Redesignated and amended by CGD 94-108, 61 FR 28290, June 4, 1996]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 20, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 13119]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1344]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for 
Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, March 28, 2007, 9 a.m. to 
March 30, 2007, 12 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge 
Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the Federal Register 
on February 26, 2007, 72 FR 8387-8389.
    The meeting will be held March 26, 2007 to March 27, 2007. The 
meeting time and location remains the same. The meeting is closed to 
the public.

    Dated: March 14, 2007.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-1344 Filed 3-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
§ 1.01-05 Definitions of terms used in this part. ( a ) The term *Commandant* means the Commandant of the Coast Guard.
( b ) The term *District Commander* means an officer of the Coast Guard designated as such by the Commandant to command all Coast Guard activities within a district.
( c ) The term *Area Commander* means an officer of the Coast Guard designated as such by the Commandant to command all Coast Guard activities within an Area.
( d ) The term *Credential* means any or all of the following: ( 1 ) Merchant mariner's document.
( 2 ) Merchant mariner's license.
( 3 ) STCW endorsement.
( 4 ) Certificate of registry.
( 5 ) Merchant mariner credential.
( e ) The term *Merchant mariner credential or MMC* means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service.
[CGD 88-033, 54 FR 50376, Dec. 6, 1989, as amended by USCG-2006-24520, 71 FR 35818, June 22, 2006; USCG-2006-24371, 74 FR 11213, Mar. 16, 2009]
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 Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report of Migo Software, Inc.,
      formerly known as PowerHouse Technologies Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kent Heyman,
      Chief
      Executive 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
      to my
      knowledge:





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





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




/s/ Kent
              HeymanKent
              HeymanChief
                Executive OfficerAugust
                30, 2006
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Peter E. Williams III, Chief Financial Officer of Saba Software, Inc. (the Company)
hereby certify, as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date: January 12, 2007



By:

/s/ PETER E. WILLIAMS IIIPeter E. Williams IIIChief Financial Officer