alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA |

JEFFREY KLEIN and BRETT BIRDWELL,

Plaintiffs, .
v. : CIVIL ACTION

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER : NO. 04-CV-955 (LFS)

CORPORATION and NORFOLK :

SOUTHERN CORPORATION, : F " L E D
Defendants. : .

stg 6 2B;
jerk

* Michaee &, AUG, Ul
» Mice Dep, Clerk

ORDER

AND NOW, this io” day of Gay-X) , 2009, it is hereby ORDERED that
defendants’ Uncontested Motion to Vacate is GRANTED. The Decisions and Orders listed
below are hereby VACATED. By separate written communication, with copies to counsel listed
on the Motion, the Court shall direct LexisNexis and Westlaw to remove the Decisions and
Orders listed below from their respective legal research services/databases.

(a) the District Court’s March 31, 2008 Memorandum Order denying
Defendants’ post-trial motions [reported at 2008 WL 879968 and 2008
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25990] (District Court Docket No. 208).

(b) the District Court’s October 11, 2006 Memorandum Order denying
Defendants’ in limine motion regarding evidence of prior electrical
contacts [reported at 2006 WL 2927280 and 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
73940] (District Court Docket No. 130).

(c) the District Court’s October 12, 2006. Memorandum Order denying
Defendants’ in limine motion regarding evidence of prior electrical
contacts [reported at 2006 WL 3000955 and 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
75942] (District Court Docket No. 145).


(@)

()

©

(g)

h)

the District Court’s March 31, 2006 Memorandum Order denying
Defendants’ summary judgment motion [reported at 2006 WL 859442 and
2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15331] (District Court Docket No. 58).

the District Court’s Memorandum Order, entered August 17, 2006,
denying Amtrak’s motion to certify pursuant to 28 USC 1292(b) [reported
at 2006 WL 2385516 and 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57613] (District Court
Docket No. 72).

the District Court’s October 2, 2006 Memorandum Order granting
Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration of the District Court’s order of July
13, 2006 with respect to Norfolk Southern’s liability as a non-possessor of
land [reported at 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80992; not reported in Westlaw] _
(istrict Court Docket No. 111).

the District Court’s October 2, 2006 Order denying Defendants’ in limine
motion regarding Amtrak’s internal memorandum dated November 17,
1983 and Amtrak’s June 20, 1984 letter [This Order is not reported in
LexisNexis or Westlaw] (District Court Docket No. 119).

the District Court’s October 10, 2006 Memorandum Order denying
Defendants’ in limine motion regarding evidence of prior electrical
contacts for the purpose of proving-punitive damages [This Order is not
reported in LexisNexis or Westlaw] (District Court Docket No. 129).

BY THE COURT:

3

fon. Lawrence F.\Stengel, J.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BEDROCK STONE AND STUFF, INC., )

HOWARD YOUNG and ) Civil Action

DEBRA YOUNG, His Wife, ) No. 04-CV-02101

 )

Plaintiffs )

 )

vs. )

 )

MANUFACTURERS AND TRADERS )

TRUST COMPANY, )

 )

Defendant )

O R D E R

NOW, this 25th day of May, 2005, upon consideration of

the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant Manufacturers and

Traders Trust Company filed January 27, 2005; upon consideration

of Plaintiffs’ Answer to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment

was filed February 16, 2005; upon consideration of the briefs of

the parties; and for the reasons expressed in the accompanying

Opinion, 

IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s motion for summary

judgment is denied.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ JAMES KNOLL GARDNER 

James Knoll Gardner

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02101-JKG Document 35 Filed 05/25/05 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2





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 Annual Report of Fund.com Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael Hlavsa, Chief Financial Officer, 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 results of operations of the Company.





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





/s/  Michael HlavsaMichael HlavsaChief Financial Officer(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)





April 23, 2010
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED NATIONAL INSURANCE

CO., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

AON LTD., et al.,

Defendants.

Civ. No. 04-539

ORDER

AND NOW, this 24th day of July, 2009, for the reasons stated in the

accompanying opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiffs’ Motion to Alter or Amend

the Judgment (docket no. 216) is hereby GRANTED, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e)

and Pennsylvania law. The Judgment Order of December 4, 2008 (docket no. 213),

awarding damages of $23,872,126.00, is hereby AMENDED to add an additional

$8,299,984.59 in interest payable to plaintiffs, for a total judgment of $32,172,110.59.

BY THE COURT:

/ s / Louis H. Pollak, J. 

Pollak, J. 

Case 2:04-cv-00539-LP Document 247 Filed 07/24/09 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:00-cv-04888-MMB Document 207 Filed 05/04/09 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:00-cv-04888-MMB Document 207 Filed 05/04/09 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:00-cv-04888-MMB Document 207 Filed 05/04/09 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:00-cv-04888-MMB Document 207 Filed 05/04/09 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:00-cv-04888-MMB Document 207 Filed 05/04/09 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:00-cv-04888-MMB Document 207 Filed 05/04/09 Page 6 of 6
No. 60725.

#### Frankenthaler Ribbons, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 285080-K and 305597-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of elastic fabrics similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 59734, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
- Bureau of the Fiscal Service
- Federal Disbursement Services 
- Fiscal Service Advisory Council (FSAC) Payments Forum

# Fiscal Service Advisory Council (FSAC) Payments Forum

The Fiscal Service Advisory Council (FSAC) Payments Forum was designed and developed by the Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Fiscal Service and the Kansas City and Philadelphia Financial Centers (now Federal Disbursement Services and Payment Integrity and Resolution Services, respectively).

Established in 2014, the annual forum became an open forum for customer agencies to express ideas, concerns and suggestions, and to have input into program planning and product development.

This forum provides a unique opportunity for agencies to hear first-hand updates about federal government payment products, services, and initiatives.

Participation is open to all federal agencies. Multiple representatives from each federal program agency are welcome to attend. However, voting on Council initiatives will be limited to one vote for each agency processing site responsible for submitting payments to the Fiscal Service.

For more information about FSAC, visit the event page.

Last modified 03/29/24
No. 52157.

protest 134296-K (New York).

#### R. Dixon & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that of the 500 cases of melons described on the invoice, the United States Inspector reported 96 cases as manifested, not found, and that said 96 cases were not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation and following *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) the court sustained the protest and directed the collector to make refund of duties taken upon the 96 eases of melons as manifested, not found.
No. 59959.

#### Empire State Chair Co., Inc., and R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 205428-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of chair seats similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 59222, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

TEXAS EASTERN TRANSMISSION, LP. : CIVIL ACTION

:

vs. :

:

DEBORAH BENNER AND :

WAYNE BENNER : No. 02-4143

O R D E R

AND NOW, TO WIT: This 2nd day of July, 2002, it having been reported that

the issues between the parties in the above action have been settled, and upon Order of the Court

pursuant to the provisions of Rule 41.1(b) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure of this Court , it

is

ORDERED that the above action is DISMISSED with prejudice, pursuant to

agreement of counsel, without costs.

MICHAEL E. KUNZ, Clerk of Court

BY: 

Gerrie M. Keane 

 Deputy Clerk

Civ 2 (8/2000)

41(b).frm

Case 2:02-cv-04143-JP Document 3 Filed 07/02/2002 Page 1 of 1
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, John D. Hellmann, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Shoe Pavilion, Inc. for the period ended April 2, 2005; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact 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 includedin 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 and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) 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 ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based upon such evaluation; 

 

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or is reasonably likely to affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: May 17, 2005
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Kinder Morgan SACROC, LP; * From the 132nd District Court

Kinder Morgan CO2 Co., LP; of Scurry County,

Kinder Morgan Production Co., LP; Trial Court No. 26387.

and Kinder Morgan Production Co., LLC,

Vs. No. 11-19-00097-CV * November 7, 2019

Scurry County; Snyder Independent * Opinion by Bailey, C.J.

School District; Scurry County Junior (Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

College District d/b/a Western Texas Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.,

College; and Scurry County Hospital sitting by assignment) 

District d/b/a Cogdell Memorial Hospital, (Willson, J., not participating)

 

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is 

no error in the order below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, the 

order of the trial court is in all things affirmed. The costs incurred by reason of 

this appeal are taxed against Kinder Morgan SACROC, LP; Kinder Morgan CO2 

Co., LP; Kinder Morgan Production Co., LP.; and Kinder Morgan Production Co., 

LLC.
Exhibit 32


CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Human Pheromone  Sciences,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  we,
William P.  Horgan,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the  Company,  and  Gregory S.
Fredrick, Chief Financial 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 1394; 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/ William P. Horgan
---------------------
November 9, 2004

/s/ Gregory S. Fredrick
-----------------------
November 9, 2004


                                       16
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 23 (Friday, February 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 5614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2467]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7785]

Department of State FY11 Service Contract Inventory

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice of the release of the Department of State FY11 Service 
Contract Inventory.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of State has publically released its Service 
Contract Inventory for FY11 and its analysis of the FY10 inventory. 
They are available here: http://csm.state.gov/. Section 743 of Division 
C of the FY 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Public Law 111-117, 
requires Department of State, and other civilian agencies, to submit an 
annual inventory of service contracts. A service contract inventory is 
a tool to assess an agency in its ability to contract services in 
support of its mission and operation and whether the contractors' 
skills are being utilized in an appropriate manner.

DATES: The FY11 inventory and FY10 analysis is available on the 
Department's Web site as of Jan. 31, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Passaro, Director, A/CSM, (703) 
875-5114, passaroja@state.gov.

    Dated: January 31, 2012.
Jason Passaro,
Director, A/CSM, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-2467 Filed 2-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-24-P
```
# Appendix 10.13

Reference 13:

Information provided by Solvay Chemicals, Inc.Copyright 2011, Solvay Chemicals, Inc.18Fly Ash ConsiderationsHigher sodium content in the fly ash.Ashes from SO2treatment typically not suitable forapplications in concrete or structural fillSolubility of sodium compounds in the fly ash (i.e.Na2SO4,Na2CO3)Disposal issues should be investigated early in theprocess. Customers encouraged to check properties andwork closely with their fly ash marketers.
Exhibit 32(ii)

                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 quaterly report on Form 10-QSB of Dialog Group,
Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Vincent DeCrescenzo, Sr., the Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, 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: July 28, 2006

                                                     /s/ Vincent DeCrescenzo
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Vincent DeCrescenzo, Sr. CFO
Before the Third Division,

July 5, 1950

No. 54518.

#### Olavarria & Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 2400-K, etc. (Norfolk).

Opinion by

Eicwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Exhibit 12.1  I, J. Paul Sorbara, President, certify that:  1. I have reviewed Fiscal 2012 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Golden Goliath Resources Ltd.;  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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The company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 company and 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 company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company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 companys internal control over financial reporting.   Date: December 28, 2012   /s/ J. Paul Sorbara J. Paul Sorbara, President/Director
No. 62441.

#### Quincy Adams Yacht Yard, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 316823-K (Boston).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protest was dismissed.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer

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 Annual Report of American Apparel Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 17, 2008 and as amended by this Amendment No. 1 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (together, the Report), I, Ken Cieply, Chief Financial
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.

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

Date: March 28, 2008



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Ken Cieply         
|Ken Cieply             
|Chief Financial Officer
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 1 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 2 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 3 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 4 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 5 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 6 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 7 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 8 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 9 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 10 of 11
Case 2:04-cv-00650-CN Document 2 Filed 02/17/04 Page 11 of 11