alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### NOV 30 1998 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH PENNSYLVANIA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as successor to the Resolution Trust Corporation, as receiver for Pioneer Savings and Loan Association, and as conservator of Pioneer Federal Savings and Loan Association, Defendant-Appellant. No. 96-3204

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS (D.C. No. 94-2088-GTV)
Gregory E. Gore, Counsel (Ann S. DuRoss, Assistant General Counsel, Thomas L. Hindes, Senior Counsel, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, with him on the brief), Washington, D.C., for Defendant-Appellant. Charles M. Thomas (Charles H. Stitt and Kenton E. Snow with him on the brief), of Craft Fridkin & Rhyne, Kansas City, Missouri, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before BRORBY, HOLLOWAY, and EBEL , Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.-2- __________________________________ This is an appeal from a summary judgment entered in favor of an insurer in a declaratory judgment action. The district court held that due to the late filing of proof of loss, recovery was barred under fidelity bonds issuedto the savings and loan association. National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. FDIC , 923 F. Supp. 1402 (D. Kan. 1996). The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as successor to the receiver for the savings and loan association, appealed. Under the Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act, K.S.A. 60-3201, et seq. , we certified to the Kansas Supreme Court the following question: “Does the failure by an insured to provide a proof of loss within the limit provided by a fidelity bond of the typ e involved here justify denial of coverage under the bond without the insurer showing that it has been substantially prejudiced by the untimely proof of loss?” The Supr eme Court of Kansas, on the facts submitted to it by our court in the certification, held that the answer under Kansas law is “No.” National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation , 957 P.2d 357 (Kan. 1998). In light of the response under Kansas law, which control s, the summary judgment entered in the instant case by the district court must be vacated, and the case must be remanded to that court for reconsideration and further proceedings. It is so ordered and the mandate shall issue forthwith.
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 Welwind Energy International Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Tammy-Lynn McNabb, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to ss. 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/ 
      Tammy Lynn McNabbTammy
      Lynn McNabb
                Principal
      Executive Officer
                April
      4, 2008
No. 61334.

protests 278635-K, etc. (New York).

#### Adolph Goldmark & Son Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of sprats in oil similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Arnold Sorensin Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 199, C. D. 1862), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than March 16, 2007.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas**                     (W. Arthur Tribble, Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:                

*1. Todd A. Seib, Dallas, Texas; Jonathan C. Seib, Dallas, Texas; and James A. Priebe, Plano, Texas;*                     to acquire additional voting shares of Gulfport Bancshares of Delaware, Inc., Richwood, Texas, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of the Brazos National Bank, Richmond, Texas.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 23, 2007.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. E7-3569 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
Exhibit 12.3

WISCONSIN POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED
CHARGES AND RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES 
    AND PREFERRED DIVIDEND REQUIREMENTS

|                                                    | Years Ended Dec. 31, 
|--------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------
|                                                    |                      
|                                                    | 2006                 
|                                                    |                      
|                                                    | (dollars in millions)
|                                                    |                      
|EARNINGS:                                           |                      
|Net income                                          |                      
|Income taxes                                        |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Income before income taxes                          |                      
|                                                   
|Fixed charges as defined                            |                      
|                                                   
|Adjustment for undistributed equity earnings        |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Total earnings as defined                           |                      
|                                                    |                      
|                                                    |                      
|FIXED CHARGES:                                      |                      
|Interest expense                                    |                      
|Estimated interest component of rent expense        |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Total fixed charges as defined                      |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                  | 3.00                 
|                                                    |                      
|Preferred dividend requirements (pre-tax basis) (a) |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Fixed charges and preferred dividend requirements   |                      
|                                                    |                      
|Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and     |                      
|Preferred Dividend Requirements                     | 2.82                 
|                                                    |                      

(a) Preferred dividend requirements
(pre-tax basis) are computed by dividing the preferred dividend requirements by one
hundred percent minus the respective annual effective income tax rate.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHAWN HAWK, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0731 MCE CMK P

vs.

ALAMEIDA, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

By order filed on June 23, 2006, the United States Marshal was directed to serve

process on defendants in this action, including K. Howard. On September 18, 2006, the United

States Marshal returned service unexecuted on K. Howard because said individual is deceased. 

In light of the suggestion of K. Howard’s death upon the record, the Clerk of the Court will be

directed to serve a copy of the USM-285 form returned by the Marshal on plaintiff together with

a copy of this order. Service of said form will invoke the ninety day time limit for filing a

motion for substitution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1). If plaintiff does not

seek substitution within 90 days of the date of this order, the court will recommend dismissal of

the action as to defendant Howard only. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1). 

Case 2:04-cv-00731-MCE -CMK Document 31 Filed 09/26/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall serve

on plaintiff forthwith a copy of the USM-285 form returned by the United States Marshal on

September 18, 2006 together with this order.

DATED: September 25, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00731-MCE -CMK Document 31 Filed 09/26/06 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>
                                                                    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


         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Horizon Medical Products,
Inc. (the "Corporation") for the period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Vice President - Finance of the Corporation, certifies 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
Corporation.


/s/ Julie F. Lancaster
------------------------------------------------------
Julie F. Lancaster
Vice President - Finance (Principal Financial Officer)
May 15, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          70,875
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  101,678
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,724
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               174,277
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 203,965
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          174,792
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        20,360
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,813
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   203,965
<SALES>                                        652,029
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               652,029
<CGS>                                          578,091
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  578,091
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                90,216
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,598
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,598
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,598
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
Order entered January 19, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-01168-CR

RICKY RAMON HUGHES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 59th Judicial District Court

Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 065922

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s January 17, 2017 unopposed second motion to extend 

time to file appellant’s brief. Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s brief shall be filed 

by February 14, 2017. We caution appellant that further requests for extension of time will be 

disfavored. 

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
EXHIBIT
32.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, the undersigned officer of Getty Realty Corp.(the “Company”) hereby
certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





(i)  the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2009 (the “Report”) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (subject to the Company's
position prevailing in regard to the remaining unresolved SEC comment, as more
fully described in the Report); and





(ii)  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, 2009





BY:/s/
      Thomas J. Stirnweis(Signature)THOMAS
      J. STIRNWEISVice
      President, Treasurer andChief
      Financial Officer





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





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 420 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 420

To prohibit Federal funds from being made available to facilities that 
   refuse to provide treatment based on COVID-19 vaccination status.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 14, 2023

Mr. Paul (for himself, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Lee, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Rubio, Ms. 
Lummis, Mr. Vance, Mr. Braun, and Mr. Cramer) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit Federal funds from being made available to facilities that 
   refuse to provide treatment based on COVID-19 vaccination status.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``COVID-19 Vaccination Non-
Discrimination Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL FUNDS FOR FACILITIES THAT REFUSE TO 
              PROVIDE TREATMENT BASED ON COVID-19 VACCINATION STATUS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds authorized or 
appropriated by Federal law, and none of the funds in any trust fund to 
which funds are authorized or appropriated by Federal law, including 
funds provided under titles XVIII, XIX, and XXI of the Social Security 
Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.; 1396 et seq.; and 1397aa et seq., 
respectively) shall be made available to a facility that refuses to 
provide treatment to an individual based on the COVID-19 vaccination 
status of such individual.
                                 <all>
```
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Vance Edward Johnson,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-0776 LKK PAN P

vs. Order

D. L. Runnels, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoJune 3, 2005, I dismissed plaintiff’s first-amended

complaint with leave to amend within 60 days because it violated

Rules 8(a) and 10(a), (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure. Plaintiff did not file a second-amended complaint or

otherwise respond to the order and so September 6, 2005, I

recommended this action be dismissed. September 27, 2005,

plaintiff objected upon the ground he did not receive the June 6,

2005, order. September 30, 2005, plaintiff filed a secondamended complaint.

Case 2:04-cv-00776-TLN-EFB Document 41 Filed 11/30/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Good cause appearing, I hereby vacate the September 6, 2005,

findings and recommendations.

So ordered.

Dated: November 29, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00776-TLN-EFB Document 41 Filed 11/30/05 Page 2 of 2
**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 European Micro Holdings, Inc. (the
      “ Company ”)
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “ Report ”),
      the
      undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




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




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




Date:October16,
                2006
            By:
            */s/
              John B. Gallagher*Name:John
                B. GallagherTitle:Co-Chief Executive Officer




Date:October16,
                2006
            By:
            */s/
              Harry D. Shields*Name:Harry
                D. ShieldsTitle:Co-Chief Executive Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, 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 European Micro Holdings, Inc. and will
      be
      retained by European Micro Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Order Granting Request for Leave to File Supplemental Answer

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

DAVID WAYNE JOHNSON,

Petitioner,

v.

J. WOODFORD, et al.,

Respondents.

NO. CIV S-04-1236 MCE KJM P

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

FILE SUPPLEMENTAL ANSWER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, Respondents are granted leave to file a Supplemental

Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Petitioner may file a reply within 30 days

from the date of service of this order. The Clerk is directed to file the Supplemental Answer

attached to Respondents’ request for leave.

DATED: July 13, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

johnson.supp.ans.wpd

Case 2:04-cv-01236-MCE -JFM Document 22 Filed 07/14/05 Page 1 of 1