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

 Plaintiff is advised to promptly submit a notice of change of address after he has been

transferred.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PERCY BRADLEY,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2033 MCE DAD P

vs.

CAPTAIN LEA, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested an extension of time to file a second amended complaint

pursuant to the court’s order of April 28, 2005. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s May 17, 2005 request for an extension of time is granted; and

2. Plaintiff is granted sixty days from the date of this order in which to file a

second amended complaint.1

DATED: May 20, 2005.

DAD/bb/4

brad2033.36

Case 2:04-cv-02033-MCE -DAD Document 16 Filed 05/23/05 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

Case 2:04-cv-02033-MCE -DAD Document 16 Filed 05/23/05 Page 2 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEWAYNE McGEE RICHARDSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1603 GEB DAD P

vs.

O. DICKINSON, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested an extension of time to file his opposition to defendants’

March 17, 2006 motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication. The

court will grant plaintiff an extension of time. 

Plaintiff is advised that in his opposition, he must respond to defendants’

statement of undisputed facts and for each fact that he disputes, plaintiff must refer to “the

particular portions of any pleading, affidavit, deposition, interrogatory answer, admission or other

document relied upon in support of that denial.” Local Rule 56-260(b). Plaintiff may file a

concise “Statement of Disputed Facts,” and provide the source of additional material facts which

demonstrate a genuine issue which precludes summary judgment. Id. 

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01603-GEB-DAD Document 38 Filed 10/20/06 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:

1. Plaintiff's October 10, 2006 application for an extension of time is granted; and

2. Plaintiff is granted twenty days from the date of this order in which to file his

opposition to defendants’ March 17, 2006 motion for summary judgment or in the alternative,

summary adjudication. No further extensions for this purpose will be granted. 

DATED: October 19, 2006.

DAD:bb/4

rich1603.36(4)

Case 2:04-cv-01603-GEB-DAD Document 38 Filed 10/20/06 Page 2 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN HARDNEY,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-04-1897 LKK GGH P

vs. ORDER 

TOM CAREY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Good cause appearing, defendants are granted a 14 day extension to file a

responsive pleading. Defendants’ responsive pleading shall be due on or before November 16,

2005.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 11/16/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

____________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01897-LKK -GGH Document 32 Filed 11/16/05 Page 1 of 1
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 
  






 
 1 INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 
50,000 
M&T BANK CORPORATION 
See Reverse for Certain Definitions 
TOTAL AUTHORIZED ISSUE 
50,000 SHARES, PAR VALUE $1.00 AND LIQUIDATION PREFERENCE $10,000 PER SHARE, 
OF PERPETUAL
FIXED-TO-FLOATING RATE NON-CUMULATIVE PREFERRED STOCK, SERIES F 
This is to Certify that Wilmington Trust, National Association is the owner of 
(as Depositary under that certain Deposit Agreement dated October 28, 2016) 
fifty thousand
(50,000) fully paid and 
non-assessable shares of the above Corporation transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly
authorized Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. 
Witness, the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized officers.
Dated October 28, 2016 
Mark J. Czarnecki Authorized Person Countersigned and Registered Marie King 
President and Chief Operating Officer Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Registrar and Transfer Agent Corporate Secretary 
© 1999 CORPEX BANKNOTE CO., BAY SHORE N.Y. SAMPLE SAMPLE SAMPLE 







 



 
 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were
written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
TEN COM - as tenants in common UNIF TRANSFERS MIN ACT-Custodian 
(Cust) (Minor) 
TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties under Uniform Transfers to Minors

Act 
JT TEN - as joint tenants with right of (State) 
survivorship and not as tenants 
in common 
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list 
For value received
hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 
PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE 
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE) 
Shares
represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint 
Attorney to transfer the said Shares on the books of the within named
Corporation with full power substitution in the premises. 
Dated 
In presence
of 
NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR
ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.
Before the Third Division,

July 20, 1944

No. 49635.

#### Protest 78533-K of Braun Importing Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In view of Abstract 45762 and stipulation of counsel that the ginger is not composed in chief value of manufactured sugar, it was held that the tax is not applicable thereto.
No. 47874.

#### Protest 20085-K of N. Y. Merchandise Co., Inc. (New York.)

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the brass shells in question are similar to those the subject of *New York Merchandise Co.*v. *United States*(8 Cust. Ct. 209, C. D. 607) they were held dutiable as articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device at 25 percent under paragraph 353 and T. D. 49753.
EXHIBIT
32.2   PATIENT PORTAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.








Certification
of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)











I, Thomas
Hagan, Acting Chief Financial Officer of Patient Portal  Technologies,
Inc. (the "Registrant"),  certify that to the best of my knowledge,
based upon a review of the  Quarterly  Report on
Form  10-QSB for the period  ended March 31, 2008 of the
Registrant (the "Report"):





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)[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
      Registrant.








Dated:  5/14/08
            /s/ THOMAS
      HAGANThomas
      HaganChief
      Financial Officer





























---
No. 66839.

#### Norman G. Jensen, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/19770, etc. (Pembina).

Opinion by

Donlon, J,

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of decharacterized horsemeat, fresh, chilled, or frozen, similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 66254, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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 Demco Industries, Inc.
(the "Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending April 30, 2004,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul Hines, Chief Executive Officer of the
company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 907 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: April 11, 2005

                               /s/ Paul Hines
                               -----------------------------------
                               Paul Hines, Chief Executive Officer
                               Demco Industries, Inc.



<PAGE>
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 Quarterly Report of m-Wise, Inc. ("the Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Gabriel Kabazo, Chief
Financial Officer, 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
comply 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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Gabriel KabazoGabriel
      Kabazo, Chief Financial OfficerDated:
      May 17, 2010
# ***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 theQuarterly Report of CHAAS Acquisitions, LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald J. Gardhouse, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Ronald J. Gardhouse        |   |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|--------|
| Ronald J. Gardhouse            |   |
| Chief Financial Officer        |   |
| (Principal Financial  Officer) |   |
| August 11, 2004                |   |

 

----
Before the Third Division,

April 22, 1958

No. 61852.

#### Amicale Industries, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 304696-K, etc. (Norfolk).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise, facts, and issues are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 Gust. Ct. 267, G. D. 1834), the collector was directed to reliquidate the entries, assessing duty upon the basis of the unit appraised value per conditioned pound or kilo, multiplied by the total number of conditioned pounds or kilos, as set forth in the invoices.
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

CHRISTOPHER LEE JENKINS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1152 MCE GGH P

vs.

J.G. ARCEO, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

1983. By order filed on December 12, 2005, plaintiff’s first amended complaint was dismissed

with leave granted for the filing of a second amended complaint. On June 21, 2005, plaintiff had 

filed an anticipatory “motion to dismiss” which requested dismissal of this action if, upon

screening of his first amended complaint, the court either found the claims not cognizable under

42 U.S.C. § 1983 or “plans to suggest that another amended complaint be filed.” Plaintiff’s

purported motion for voluntary dismissal is conditional and is, therefore, not a genuine and

complete request or notice for voluntary dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). Plaintiff, for

example, does not address the instance of a screening which determines, as occurred in this case,

that some claims are cognizable upon which plaintiff could proceed upon a modified first

amended complaint (i.e., from which a number of claims and defendants have been dismissed) if

Case 2:04-cv-01152-MCE -GGH Document 29 Filed 12/22/05 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

he elected not to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiff’s defective “motion to dismiss,” 

filed on June 21, 2005, must be disregarded. Should plaintiff seek voluntary dismissal of his

case, he must file a notice of dismissal of this action, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a), without

setting forth conditions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 12/21/05 

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

jenk1152.dsm

Case 2:04-cv-01152-MCE -GGH Document 29 Filed 12/22/05 Page 2 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TINA M. EQUELS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1567 FCD KJM P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed August 5, 2004, plaintiff was given leave to file an amended civil

action and application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the application filing fee. Plaintiff has

not responded to the court’s order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01571-DFL -KJM Document 3 Filed 06/30/05 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

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: June 29, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

eque1567.fta

Case 2:04-cv-01571-DFL -KJM Document 3 Filed 06/30/05 Page 2 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VAHN JALADIAN, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1304 LKK CMK P

vs.

C.A. HUGHES, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On June 9, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Neither party has filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01304-LKK -CMK Document 47 Filed 09/11/06 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

1. The findings and recommendations filed June 9, 2006 are adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (doc. 32) is granted in part and

denied in part;

a. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment regarding plaintiff’s claim

that defendant Cribbs violated his Eighth Amendment rights on July 15, 2003 is denied;

b. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment regarding plaintiff’s claim

that defendants Hughes, Rodriguez, Butler, Chandler, Grannis and Brown violated his Eighth

Amendment rights on July 15, 2003 is granted;

c. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim that

defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights on November 23, 2003 is granted;

d. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s retaliation

claim is granted; and

e. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s discrimination

claim under Title VII of the ADA is granted.

DATED: September 11, 2006.

Case 2:04-cv-01304-LKK -CMK Document 47 Filed 09/11/06 Page 2 of 2
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

YVONNE MICHELLE ELIZONDO,

Appellant,

v. §

§

§

§ No. 08

- 13

- 00162

- CV

Appeal from the

210th District Court

FABENS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL

DISTRICT, § of El Paso County, Texas

Appellee. § (TC# 2010

- 3555)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the Appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal and

concludes the motion should be granted and the appeal should be dismissed. We therefore

dismiss the appeal. We further order Appellant pay all costs of this appeal, and this decision be

certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2013.

GUADALUPE RIVERA, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Neal C. Isaacson,certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of EnerNOC, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Reserved;

c) Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

d) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: October 29, 2007
|   |   |   | By:    | /s/ Neal C.  Isaacson                    |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   |   | Neal C. Isaacson                              |
|   |   |   |   | Chief Financial Officer                       |
|   |   |   |   | (principal financial  and accounting officer) |

 

----
Exhibit 10.2


                  ASSIGNMENT OF OPTION TO PURCHASE PROPERTY

   For good and valuable consideration, I, Scott Wetzel, an individual,
hereby assign all right, title and interest in the Option Agreement entered
into by and between myself, as an individual and IBEX MINERALS, INC., on
November 1, 2007, to Trevenex Resources, Inc, a Nevada corporation.

Dated this 14th day of December, 2007

_____________________________________
Scott Wetzel



<PAGE>
Before the First Division,

December 8, 1958

No. 62550.

#### Everbest Jewelry Corporation *v.*United States,

protest 324695-K (New York).

*435Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the articles covered by item 3132 (“Gent's Bracelets all brass chrome plated”) are articles of jewelry known as identification bracelets, the claim at 55 percent under paragraph 1527 (a) (2), as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 51802), was sustained. Item 723PB ("Polished brass Plaque”) and item 723PO (“Chrome plated Brass Plaque”), stipulated to consist of parts of jewelry, valued under 20 cents per dozen pieces, were held dutiable at 22)4 percent under the provision in paragraph 397, as modified, *supra,*for metal articles, not specially provided for, as claimed.
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74

36 38 40 42


### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 08/01 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 01 Aug 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.41 N 76.30 WMeters AGL