alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dale Wright, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 833]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Firetog, J.), rendered April 6, 1994, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (three counts), assault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (four counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Curci, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification evidence.

*578Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his contention that the court improperly participated in the hearing proceeding *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]). In any event, the hearing court properly intervened in an effort to clarify the issues and facilitate the expeditious and orderly progress of the proceeding *(see, People v Moulton,*43 NY2d 944; *People v Dominguez,*210 AD2d 249; *People v Harrison,*151 AD2d 778). Additionally, the hearing court correctly determined that the showup identification procedure was not unnecessarily suggestive *(see, People v Duuvon,*77 NY2d 541; *People v Dawson,*185 AD2d 854).

Also unpreserved for our review is the defendant’s contention that his conviction of assault in the first degree should be reduced to assault in the second degree because the evidence was insufficient to support a showing of "serious physical injury” *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that the testimony of the complainant that the gunshot wound to his shoulder resulted in nerve damage to his right arm causing loss of sensitivity in his right hand was legally sufficient to establish the "protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ” (Penal Law § 10.00 [10]; § 120.10 [4]; *see, People v Kern,*75 NY2d 638; *People v Palmer,*197 AD2d 712; *People v Blunt,*176 AD2d 741). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
**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 Annual Report of PATRIOT NATIONAL BANCORP, INC. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Michael A. Carrazza and Joseph D. Perillo, the Principal Executive Officer and the Principal 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; 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/ Michael A. Carrazza                                                                           |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Michael A. Carrazza                                                                               |
|   | Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |
|   |                                                                                              |
|   | /s/ Joseph D. Perillo                                                                             |
|   | Joseph D. Perillo                                                                                 |
|   | Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)                                            |

 

Date: May 9, 2018

 

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

UNTY 

FICE OF 

DUCATION 1398 SPERBER ROAD • EL CENTRO, CALIFORNIA 92243 • (760) 312-6464 • FAX (760) 312-6565 

ANNE j. MALLORY 

SUPERINTENDENT 

May 13,2014 

Secretary Anthony Foxx 

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washingtol;l, DC 20590 

RE: Docket DOT -OST -2008-0299 

Dear Secretary Foxx, 

Anne J Mallory, Superintendent 

t"' ... 

. :·:.1 

··" 

"'""'••·· 

i.,., __ ;; 

.... - .... :·· 

I write to express my concerns with the Department of Transportation's Tentative Order to 

terminate the Essential Air Service (EAS) program in El Centro, California located in Imperial 

County. I urge you to consider the negative economic impacts that may occur as a result of the 

wroposed termination pf the program. 

The Imperial County Airport has a tremendous track record of surpassing the EAS program 

requirements put forth by the government, as they have dramatically exceeded the enplanement 

minimum in four ofthe last five fiscal years. Unfortunately, in FY 2013, the Imperial County 

Airport barely fell below the ten enplanement threshold, by reaching 9.5 enplanements for the 

first time. 

As you know, the Essential Air Service was put into place to guarantee that small communities, 

including those within the Imperial County, continue to be served by certificated air carriers. 

Over the last several years, Imperial County has experienced the highest unemployment rate in 

the nation. Our federal government should encourage economic growth, and consider all factors 

before terminating a much-needed program in the region. 

As you prepare the Final Order, I urge you to consider the Imperial Valley's track record over 

the last three fiscal years, and ask that you consider the void that will be left should the 

Department of Transportation ultimately decide to terminate the much-needed Essential Air 

Service program currently in effect at the Imperial County Airport. 

Thank you for your time and consideration of my request. 

(};~ IUI/46 . 

Anrte I. Mall~, Imperllll County Supenntendent of Schools 

Sharon Anderholt Alicia Armenta 

County Board of Education 

Sabrina C. Barber Annette Buttner Susan E. Manger
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 2206** 

In Re: STUART WAYNE TOMPKINS , Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

. ( 1:10

- cv - 00978

- TDS

- LPA )

Submitted : December 30, 2013 Decided: January 14, 2014

Before SHEDD, FLOYD, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.
Stuart Wayne Tompkins , Petitioner Pro Se

.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Stuart Wayne Tompkins petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking assistance from this c ourt in enforcing any possible
settlement this c ourt may have issued in a prior appeal. *
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circ umstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976) ; United States v. Moussaoui , 333 F.3d
509, 516

- 17 (4th Cir. 2003) . Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass ’ n , 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988)

. The relief sought by Tompkins is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.
PETITION DENIED

* We grant Tompkins’ request for leave to file the petition.
# Map            The disputed area of Kashmir.
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

JOEL ANTHONY HOLLEY, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2708 LKK PAN P

vs.

TOM CAREY, Warden, 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 April 13, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections

to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has not 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-02708-LKK -EFB Document 15 Filed 05/25/05 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

1. The findings and recommendations filed April 13, 2005, are adopted in full;

and

2. Claims against defendants Wofford, Clay and Cervantes are dismissed without

prejudice. 

DATED: May 25, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

/holl2708.800

Case 2:04-cv-02708-LKK -EFB Document 15 Filed 05/25/05 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, John D.  Aquilino,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that the Annual
Report of Viastar  Media  Corporation  on Form  10-KSB for the fiscal year ended
June 30,2004 fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934 and that  information  contained  in such
Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB  fairly  presents  in all  material  respects  the
financial condition and results of operations of Viastar Media Corporation

Dated:   November 16, 2004         By: /s/ John D. Aquilino
                                           ---------------------------------
                                           John D. Aquilino
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer

     A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been provided to Viastar Media Corporation and will be retained by Viastar Media
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
(Reap. Dec. 10482)

#### Finwood Industries, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 9869, etc.

(Decided April 8, 1963)

*Siegel, Mandell é Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

The merchandise the subject of the appeals for reappraisemeht enumerated in the schedule attached hereto consists of birch plywood, exported from Finland in the years 1952,1953,1954, 1955, and 1956.

Counsel for the parties have stipulated and agreed that the merchandise and issues involved in the said appeals are the same in all material respects as those in the case of *United States*v. *Plywood & Door Manufacturers*Corporation, 46 Cust. Ct. 797, A.R.D. 133, decided on remand in *Plywood & Door Manufacturers Corporation*v. *United*States, 48 Cust. Ct. 526, Reap. Dec. 10151, and that the record in that case be incorporated as part of the record herein.

The appeals have been submitted for decision on written stipulation, on the basis of which I find that export value, as defined in section 402(d), Tariff Act of 1930, as in effect prior to the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis for the determination of the values of the birch plywood involved and that such values are those set forth in column “4” of said schedule, packed, less the prorated amounts of the nondutiable charges set forth directly after the description of the merchandise in each said reappraisement case set forth in said schedule.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Frank, Alston and Senior Judge Coleman 

UNINSURED EMPLOYER’S FUND 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 0683-10-3 PER CURIAM 

 AUGUST 10, 2010 

DAVID SCOTT RIGGS 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (John R. Sigmond; Penn, Stuart & Eskridge, on brief), for appellant. 

 No brief for appellee. 

 The Uninsured Employer’s Fund (hereinafter referred to as the Fund) appeals a decision 

of the Workers’ Compensation Commission awarding David Scott Riggs (claimant) temporary 

total disability. The Fund contends the commission erred in finding the claimant demonstrated 

he was totally disabled from October 11, 2008 through March 29, 2009. 

 We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find that this appeal is 

without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final 

opinion. See Riggs v. Boston’s Essential Cuts Tree Service, VWC File No. VA010-0242-2200 

(Mar. 2, 2010). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

Affirmed.

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
#### Mary A. Harlinger, *as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v.*The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, *Appellant.*

Order affirmed. Opinion by Smith, P. J.
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


The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
649.com Inc.


/s/ Mark Glusing                                 Date: March 29, 2005
------------------------------
Mark Glusing
President / Director


<PAGE>
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4219 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4219

To amend the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act to eliminate a 
requirement that certain individuals be related by blood or marriage to 
be eligible for farm loans as a qualified beginning farmer or rancher, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 1, 2024

  Mr. Welch (for himself, Mr. Sanders, and Ms. Smith) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                  Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act to eliminate a 
requirement that certain individuals be related by blood or marriage to 
be eligible for farm loans as a qualified beginning farmer or rancher, 
                        and for other purposes.

    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 ``Future Farmers and Ranchers of 
Tomorrow Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY FOR FARM LOANS AS A QUALIFIED BEGINNING FARMER OR 
              RANCHER.

    Section 343(a)(11) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
Act (7 U.S.C. 1991(a)(11)) is amended--
            (1) by striking subparagraph (C); and
            (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) through (G) as 
        subparagraphs (C) through (F), respectively.
                                 <all>
```
UASolutions Group, Inc. www.uasolutionsgroup.com

2518 Auburn Drive, Cocoa, FL 32926 (321)-261-2547 

uasolutionsgroup@uasolutionsgroup.com

August 11, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Bldg. 10A

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

RE: Summary Grant for Ryan Noonan Exemption Request Under Section 333 of 

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Modernization and Reform Act of 

2012, 49 U.S.C. § 44701(f), and 14 C.F.R. Part 11

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), 49 

U.S.C. § 44701(f), and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Ryan Noonan an operator of Small Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems (“sUAS”) equipped to conduct full service photography and videography, 

seeks exemption from the following listed Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to allow 

commercial operation of the DJI Phantom Series and DJI Inspire within the National 

Airspace System (NAS) for controlled, low-risk, aerial video and photography of Real 

Estate Properties (for homeowners, realtors, home builders, home contractors and / or 

home inspectors for real estate marketing and inspection of home exteriors) as well as 

filming of special events, and film sets over certain areas of the United States, conducted 

within and under the conditions outlined herein, or as may be established by the FAA, as 

required by Section 333 requirements. 

Ryan Noonan in the accompanying petition, seeks exemption from the requirements of 

14 C.F.R. §§ 45.27(a), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.105, 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(b), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2),and 91.417(a) and (b). 

Ryan Noonan has requested that the FAA not request public comment on its petition 

because it would not set any precedent and because the relief requested is identical to 

numerous exemptions granted previously by the FAA. 14 C.F.R. § 11.87. 

In addition, Ryan Noonan will be utilizing the same DJI Phantom Series and DJI Inspire

proven technologies the FAA has already accepted and approved in over 75 percent of 

approved exemptions. All of the appropriate documentation to accompany Ryan 

Noonan’s Section 333 Petition is included. Combined, the comprehensive Section 333 
UASolutions Group, Inc. www.uasolutionsgroup.com

2518 Auburn Drive, Cocoa, FL 32926 (321)-261-2547 

uasolutionsgroup@uasolutionsgroup.com

Exemption and the approvals the FAA has already given to these chosen products and 

the technology, should provide the support necessary to the FAA for a Summary Grant 

of Ryan Noonan’s Section 333 Petition and expedite the process. 

Kelly J. Neubecker

CEO

UASolutions Group, Inc.

CC:

Bill Crozier

Joe Morra

Jake Troutman

Dean Griffith, Esq.

Robert Papas
#### Cyrus B. Lawrence, *Respondent, v.*Henry Tucker, *Appellant.*

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Opinion by Brady, J.
----

Exhibit 31.1

Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 

I, Guoshen Tu, certify that: 

1. 

I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of China Security & Surveillance Technology,Inc.; 

2. 

Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report; 

3. 

Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, 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’sother certifying 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 consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; 

(b) 

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 

(c) 

Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. 

The registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant'sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent function): 

(a) 

All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and 

(b) 

Any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 13, 2007 

/s/ Guoshen Tu                                Guoshen Tu Chief Executive Officer 

----
```

[112th Congress Public Law 279]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[[Page 126 STAT. 2482]]

Public Law 112-279
112th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  218 North Milwaukee Street in Waterford, Wisconsin, as the ``Captain 
 Rhett W. Schiller Post Office''. <<NOTE: Jan. 14, 2013 -  [S. 3630]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CAPTAIN RHETT W. SCHILLER POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 218 North Milwaukee Street in Waterford, Wisconsin, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Captain Rhett W. Schiller Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Captain 
Rhett W. Schiller Post Office''.

    Approved January 14, 2013.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 3630:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:
                                                        Vol. 158 (2012):
                                    Dec. 19, considered and passed 
                                        Senate.
                                                        Vol. 158 (2013):
                                    Jan. 1, considered and passed House.

                                  <all>
```