alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case No. 16,119.

#### UNITED STATES v. FIVE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS IN SPECIE.

[1 Woods, 14.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Lousiana.

April Term, 1870.

Appeal—Admiralty—Terms of Court.

An appeal in a case of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction not taken to the next term of the circuit court after the rendition of the decree in the district court will be dismissed.

[Cited in The Chatham. 3 C. C. A. 161, 52 Fed. 397.]

Appeal from the district court of the United States for the district of Louisiana.

The specie in this case was seized upon water and within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the district court. The court below having decreed in favor of claimant [case unreported], the United States appealed to this court. Thereupon a motion was made by claimant to dismiss the appeal.

Jos. P. Horner and W. S. Benedict, for the motion.

Aianson B. Long, U. S. Atty., contra.

1

 [Reported by Hon. William B. Woods, Circuit Judge, and here reprinted by permission.]

WOODS, Circuit Judge.

In this case, a motion to dismiss the appeal is made upon the ground that the appeal was not taken to the next circuit court of the United States, held within the district after the rendition of the decree. The record shows that the decree in favor of the defendant was signed on January 30, 1864. The law and records of this court show that the next circuit court for the district was held on the 25th of April, 1864. *1105An appeal was prayed and allowed on May 13, 1864, returnable on the first Monday of November, 1864, and the record was filed in this court on October 12, 1864. The law says that appeals are allowed from final decrees in the district court, in cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, to the next circuit court to be held in the district. 1 Stat. 83. This appeal was not taken to the next circuit court after the rendition of the decree, but one entire term of the circuit court was allowed to pass over, and the appeal was taken to the next following term. The causes referred to in the brief of appellee show that it is the practice of the circuit courts to dismiss appeals when not taken to the next circuit court. This practice is founded upon the statute, and seems to be in conformity with the policy of the law in cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. That policy requires speedy administration of justice, and discourages delay. The statute says the appeal may be taken to the next circuit court, it authorizes an appeal to no other term. If we were authorized to depart from the wise rule laid down by the act of congress, there would be no limit to the delay which would follow in this class of cases. Because, therefore, the appeal was not taken to the next term of the circuit court held in the district after the rendition of the decree, the appeal must be dismissed.
|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | To my knowledge, 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 29, 2011 |   | By:   | /s/ Daniel  J. Santaniello |
|---------------------------------|--------|-----------------|--------------------------------------|
|                            |   |            | Daniel J. Santaniello, President     |
|                            |   |            | and Chief Executive Officer          |

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Tyler, Appellant.

[634 NYS2d 389]

—Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (DeLury, J.), rendered July 14, 1994, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court (Kreindler, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf, People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BEVERLY BITTNER; ESTATE OF

DONALD SWISHER; and ANTHONY

COVARRUBIAS, ERIC COVARRUBIAS,

SABRINA COVARRUBIAS, ALEXANDER

COVARRUBIAS, and DANTE 

COVARRUBIAS, by and through

their Guardian ad Litem

LENETTE COVARRUBIAS,

NO. CIV. S-04-1901 LKK/KJM

Plaintiffs,

v. O R D E R

TERESA SCHWARTZ, Warden, California

Medical Facility; SGT. WALKER;

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER VAN;

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER MAY;

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER MILES;

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER COOZ;

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER PHAM;

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ARCHER; 

XUEWIE ZHU, M.D.; and WESLEY

McALLISTER, M.D.,

Defendants.

 /

////

////

Case 2:04-cv-01901-LKK -KJM Document 26 Filed 01/17/06 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

The court is in receipt of the joint request to extend

deadlines for the filing of expert reports. The court also

conferred with the parties by telephone on January 10, 2006. No

good cause being shown, the motion to extend deadlines is DENIED.

The parties are invited to re-file a formal motion to extend

deadlines in which all relevant facts and events are set forth. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: January 13, 2006.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-01901-LKK -KJM Document 26 Filed 01/17/06 Page 2 of 2
Chemical Structure Substance No.1 [ X] entire page is 

### CBI
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C.
1350) In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ended September 30, 2017 (the “Report”) of TICC Capital
Corp. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Jonathan H. Cohen,
the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to
the best of my knowledge, that: (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
operations of the Registrant. /s/ Jonathan H. CohenName:

Jonathan H. CohenDate:

November 2, 2017
No. 57355.

protests 181870-K (B), etc. (New York).

#### Langfelder, Homma & Carroll, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise • consists of celluloid reindeer similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 56902, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 61905.

#### Walter B. Stevens & Son, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 305097-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of harness hardware for use with harness for dogs the same in all material respects as that involved in *International Expediters, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 230, C. D. 1868), the claim of plaintiffs was sustained.
#### In the Matter of Susan P. Lilienthal.

Order reversed, rehearing directed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to abide the event. Opinion by D aniels, J.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, (the
Report) of UTEK Corporation (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Douglas Schaedler, the Principal Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my
knowledge, that:

(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 operations of the Registrant.



/s/    DOUGLAS
SCHAEDLERName:

Douglas SchaedlerDate:

May 7, 2009
No. 51006.

#### Protests 120351-K, etc., of Guzofsky Kalinsky, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Goldman, Davis, Murr & Cooper. The Influence of 1, 2 and 4 Days of Atrazine Treatments on 

the LH Surge in Ovariectomized / Estradiol-primed Rats: Preliminary Report to the Office of 

Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention

Abstract

The herbicide atrazine has been found in female rodents to suppress the midcycle surge of 

pituitary luteinizing hormone (LH) that in response to input from the brain serves as the trigger 

for the final stages of ovarian follicular and oocytic development that precede ovulation. 

Atrazine has also been reported to stimulate the secretion of both progesterone and 

corticosterone, suggesting that these increases may be a factor affecting the LH surge. Using an 

ovariectomized / estradiol-primed animal model in order to control the circulating 

concentrations of estradiol and induce daily LH surges, female rats were dosed by oral gavage 

for 1, 2, or 4 days with 0 or 100 mg/kg atrazine In response to multiple exposures, this 

concentration of atrazine had previously been established to block the surge. The experiments 

revealed two important findings. First, the effect of a single dose of atrazine in ovariectomized 

rats increased adrenal steroid secretion, and this treatment caused a statistically significant 

enhancement in the LH surge, an effect consistent with an exposure to progesterone in the 

hours prior to the anticipated appearance of the rise in LH. Multiple doses were found to 

suppress the surge, which is likely a consequence of a more extended exposure to the adrenal 

steroids. This temporal aspect of a rise in these steroids on the LH surge has long been known 

and in the case of atrazine emphasizes the influence of the adrenals on the relationship 

between the brain and pituitary in generation of the surge.
EXHIBIT 7

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 on Form 40-F of Sun Life Financial Inc. (the Company) for the year ended
December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his respective 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 operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: February 17, 2011



/S/ Donald A.
StewartDonald A. StewartChief Executive Officer


Date: February 17, 2011

/S/ Colm J.
FreyneColm J. FreyneExecutive Vice-President andChief Financial Officer


This certificate has not been, and shall not be deemed to have been, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
EX-4.16



 Exhibit 4.16 
  

	To:	  Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation Europe Limited as Agent 


	From:	Knutsen NYK Offshore Tankers AS on behalf of itself and the other Obligors and KNOT Offshore Partners L.P. as Replacement Guarantor 


 

			
	Dear Sirs		Date: 15 December 2014

 KNOT USD 172,500,000 Facility Agreement dated 3 April 2014 (the “Agreement”) 

 

	1.	We refer to the Agreement. This is an Accession Letter. Terms defined in the Agreement have the same meaning in this Accession Letter unless given a different meaning in this Accession Letter. 


 

	2.	KNOT Offshore Partners L. P. (“KNOP”) agrees to become a Replacement Guarantor with respect to all amounts outstanding in respect of KNOT Shuttle Tanker 20 AS and the Vessel “Dan Cisne” and to be
bound by the terms of the Agreement as a Replacement Guarantor pursuant to Clause 28.2 (KNOP as Replacement Guarantor) of the Agreement. KNOP is a company duly incorporated under the laws of the Marshall Islands. 


 

	3.	KNOP’s administrative details are as follows: 

 Address: 

KNOT Offshore Partners LP 
 2
Queen’s Cross, 
 Aberdeen, 

Aberdeenshire AB15 4YB, 
 United
Kingdom 
 Fax No: +44 (0) 1224 624891 

Attention: Arild Vik (CFO/CEO) 
  

	4.	This Accession Letter is governed by Norwegian law and KNOP has appointed KNOT Shuttle Tanker 20 AS its process agents in respect of this Accession Letter and the other Finance Documents. 


Knutsen NYK Offshore Tanker AS 
  

	
	 /s/ ØYSTEIN M. KALLEKLEV

	Name: Øystein Moksheim Kalleklev
	Title: Chief Financial Officer
	KNOT Offshore Partners, L.P.

  

	
	 /s/ ARILD VIK

	Name: Arild Vik
	Title: CEO

 Confirmed by the Agent 







 Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation Europe Limited 

 

	
	 /s/ Ragnhild Steigberg

	Name: Ragnhild Steigberg
	Title: Attorney in Fact

 Confirmed by the process agent 

KNOT Shuttle Tanker 20 AS 
  

	
	 /s/ ØYSTEIN M. KALLEKLEV

	Name: Øystein Moksheim Kalleklev
	Title: Chief Financial Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 July 26, 2016

t0718

Order 

Clerk

July 26, 2016

150913

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 150913

COA: 323964 

Kalamazoo CC: 2013-000898-FH

SHANTEL NICOLE-LIZA-MARIE SMITH,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 5, 2014 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Kalamazoo Circuit Court to 

determine whether the court would have imposed a materially different sentence under 

the sentencing procedure described in People v Lockridge, 498 Mich 358 (2015). On 

remand, the trial court shall follow the procedure described in Part VI of our opinion. If 

the trial court determines that it would have imposed the same sentence absent the 

unconstitutional constraint on its discretion, it may reaffirm the original sentence. If, 

however, the trial court determines that it would not have imposed the same sentence 

absent the unconstitutional constraint on its discretion, it shall resentence the defendant. 

In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED because we are not persuaded that the 

remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

We do not retain jurisdiction.
Jump to main content.

## THIS IS AN ARCHIVED SITE

This site contains information that has been considered archived and will no longer be updated.  Please click here to go to the CURRENT eda.gov website.

        - About  LeadershipEconomic Development IntegrationOffice of Innovation and EntrepreneurshipInvestment PrioritiesEDA's 50th AnniversaryEDA Job Opportunities! 
        - How to Apply  Funding Opportunities 
        - Programs/Initiatives  EDA ProgramsMulti-Agency InitiativesDisaster RecoveryUniversity Centers 
        - Success Stories
        - Tools  Research ReportsCurrent Grantee Forms 
        - Newsroom  BlogsPress ReleasesNewslettersMedia 
        - Contact  Share Your Story 

# Newsroom

# Newsletter Archive

Archives: 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011

## 2017

Currently no 2017 Newsletters available

# In This Section:

- Newsroom
- Blogs
- Press Releases
- Newsletters
- Media

Resources Directory
Stay ConnectedClick here to subscribe to EDA's monthly e-newsletter
EDA Annual Reports

## Useful Links:

- EDA Regulations
- About the Department of Commerce
- Department of Commerce Strategic Plan and Annual Performance plans
- Department of Commerce Organizational Structure, Mission and Statutory Authority
- No FEAR Act

### Follow Us

Follow us on TwitterFollow us on Facebook

## Blog Archive:

- 2016    - December
  - November
  - October
  - September
  - August
  - July
  - June
  - May
  - April
  - March
  - February 
- 2015    - December
  - November
  - October
  - September
  - August
  - July
  - June
  - May
  - April
  - March
  - February
  - January 
- 2014    - December
  - November
  - October
  - September
  - August
  - July
  - June
  - May
  - April
  - March
  - February
  - January 
- 2013    - December
  - November
  - October
  - September
  - August
  - July
  - June
  - May
  - April
  - February 
- 2012    - December
  - September
  - August
  - July
  - June
  - May
  - April
  - March
  - February
  - January 
- 2011    - December
  - November
  - October
  - September
  - August
  - July
  - June
  - May
  - April
  - March
  - February
  - January 

Privacy Policy | Department of Commerce | FOIA | USA.gov | Information Quality | Disclaimer | Important Links | Contact EDA
#### The Irving National Bank, *Respondent, v.*Jay L. Adams, *Appellant.*

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Opinion by Daniels, J.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 17, 2015

No. 04-14-00621-CV

IN THE INT OF CJT, A CHILD,

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Zapata County, Texas

Trial Court No. 7,848

Honorable H. Paul Canales, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The two appellees in this appeal, Francisco Tovar Guajardo and Irma Perez Chapa, are 

represented by separate appellate counsel. Both appellees’ briefs were originally due to be filed 

in this appeal on May 18, 2015. Both appellees previously were granted an extension of time to 

file their briefs, extending the deadline to June 17, 2015. Both appellees have filed a second 

motion requesting an additional extension of time to file their briefs until July 17, 2015, for a

total extension of sixty days. The motions are GRANTED. THIS IS THE FINAL 

EXTENSION OF TIME THAT APPELLEES WILL BE GRANTED. Appellees’ briefs

must be filed by July 17, 2015, or this appeal will be set “at issue” and submitted without briefs

filed by appellees.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 17th day of June, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4606 

To authorize the appropriation of amounts for the planning and design 

of a civil engineering group facility at Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 20, 2024 

Mr. OSSOFF introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To authorize the appropriation of amounts for the planning 

and design of a civil engineering group facility at Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Dobbins Civil Engi5 neering Support Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4606 IS

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF AMOUNTS FOR PLANNING AND 

2 DESIGN OF A CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP FA3 CILITY AT DOBBINS AIR RESERVE BASE, 

4 GEORGIA. 

5 There is authorized to be appropriated to the Sec6 retary of Defense for fiscal year 2025 $1,200,000 for the 

7 planning and design of a civil engineering group facility 

8 at Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED BYSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of RockwoodSpecialties Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Seifi Ghasemi, Chairman and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

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

2.             Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: November 14, 2006              |   |
|--------------------------------------|--------|
|                                 |   |
| /s/ SEIFI GHASEMI                    |   |
| Seifi Ghasemi                        |
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |

 

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company forpurposes of Section 18 or any other provision of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended.

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 or otherdocument authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature thatappears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statementrequired by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retainedby the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----