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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VIRNA L. SANTOS,

Plaintiff,

v.

LORETTA LYNCH,

Defendants.

No. 1:16-cv-00351-DAD-SMS

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION RE 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DISMISSAL 

OR TRANSFER

(Doc. Nos. 9, 13)

On April 29, 2016, defendant Loretta Lynch filed a motion to dismiss this action for lack 

of venue pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or in the alternative, 

to transfer the matter to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. (Doc. No. 

9.) Subsequently, on May 27, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation to transfer this action to the 

District of Columbia. (Doc. No. 13.) 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), “[t]he district court of a district in which is filed a case 

laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, 

transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.” According to 

the stipulation, the parties agree that the District of Columbia is the only district for which venue 

is proper. (Doc. No. 13 at 1.) Finding good cause and in the interests of justice, the court grants 

the parties’ stipulation.
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

2

Accordingly,

1. The parties’ stipulation to transfer this action to the District of Columbia (Doc. No. 

13) is granted;

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to transfer this action to the United States District 

Court for the District of Columbia as soon as reasonably possible;

3. Defendant’s motion for dismissal or transfer (Doc. No. 9) is denied as moot; and 

4. The initial scheduling conference, currently set for June 22, 2016 before Magistrate 

Judge Sandra M. Snyder, is vacated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 31, 2016 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of
CurrencySharesSMEuro Trust (the Trust) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Arruda, Chief Financial Officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the
Trust, 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, 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 Trust.



|                             
|-----------------------------
|Date: June 9, 2010           
|                             
|/s/ Joseph Arruda            
|Joseph
Arruda*               
|Chief Financial Officer      
|(principal financial officer)



|* | The Registrant is
a trust and Joseph Arruda is signing in his capacity as the principal financial officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Registrant.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JARON AMBROSE,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 341 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 29th day of April, 2024

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
**PURSUANT      TO 18 U.S.C. 1350**

|                                         |   |   |                                                            |
|----------------------------------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                         |   |   |                                                            |
| Date: August              2,  2007 |   |   | /s/              B.K.              Gogia                        |
|                                              |   |   | B.K.                GogiaChief                Executive Officer |
|                                              |   |   |                                                                 |
|                                         |   |   |                                                                     |
|----------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: August              2,  2007 |   |   | /s/              Scott B. Parliament                                     |
|                                              |   |   | Scott                B. ParliamentChief                Financial Officer |

----
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATIONS



I, Randall D. Stilley, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Hercules Offshore, Inc.;



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



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



4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the
registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) Disclosed in this report any change in
the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



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



(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



Date:
December 9, 2005



|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Randall D. Stilley               
|    |  | Randall D. Stilley                   
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer and President
| 1.     | Such                  Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending 30                  November 2007, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for                  the quarter ending 30 November 2007, fairly presents, in all                  material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                  of                  Red Rock Pictures Holdings                  Inc. |

|  By: | /s/                Robert                Levy |
|-----------|-----------------------------------------------|
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.35



                       EXECUTIVE INCENTIVE PLANS FOR 1997


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  PORTION   
                                           1997       PORTION    BASED ON   
                                          BONUS        BASED     PERSONAL   
            EXECUTIVE OFFICER            MAXIMUM       ON EPS      GOALS    
                                         ---------    -------    --------
    <S>                                   <C>         <C>         <C>
                                                       (a)         (b)
    William H. Wilcox, President, CEO     $300,000       100%       ----

    Mark E. Pape, Senior Vice             $110,550        85%        15%

    Peter R. Barnett, Senior Vice         $110,550        85%        15%
</TABLE>



NOTES:

(a)   The percentage in this column reflects the portion of the maximum bonus
      that may be paid upon achievement of targeted earnings per share.  This
      percentage may be reduced to zero if an established minimum level of
      earnings per share is not achieved.

(b)   The percentage in this column reflects the portion of the maximum bonus
      that may be awarded upon achievement of defined personal objectives.
      Such objectives are individually designed to reflect the executive s
      functional responsibilities within the context of the company s strategic
      and tactical objectives.  This percentage may be reduced to zero if the
      defined personal objectives are not achieved.
Sky Guardian LLC

Unmanned Aerial Solutions

P.O. Box 1074. Bisbee, AZ 85603

WWW.SKYGUARDIAN.ORG

December 22, 2015 

RE: Amendment No. 2 to Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0514 Exemption No. 11604 Which was approved on May 15, 

2015

We request allowance to amend our Exemption No. 11604 to include the following platform:

AD-2 UAS system.

Operating instructions are not added to this request however will be added to the operating instructions on file 

at our office.

Operating instructions are basically the same as instructions for the AD-Talon and the AD-1. Any major changes 

that are found will be submitted to the FAA.

Attached is a brochure of the AD-2

Respectfully,

John E. Gribble

Flight Operations Manager

jgribble@skyguardian.org

520-234-5911
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-1542

In re: OWEN ODDMAN, a/k/a Star, a/k/a Charles Llewlyn,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:96-cr-00053-MR-1)

Submitted: August 23, 2018 Decided: August 27, 2018

Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Owen Oddman, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Owen Oddman petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the 

district court to resentence him to a lower term of imprisonment. We conclude that 

Oddman is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary 

circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. 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). Moreover, mandamus may not be used as 

a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).

The relief sought by Oddman is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, 

although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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 this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
      10.3

     

    FREEDOM
      1, INC. (the “Corporation”)

     

    STOCK
      SUBSCRIPTION

     

    December
      27, 2006

     

    SECTION
      1. SUBSCRIPTION

     

    The
      undersigned hereby subscribes to 1 share of common stock (“Shares”) of the
      Corporation, a Delaware corporation and agrees to transfer to the Corporation
      in
      consideration for the Shares cash in the amount of $1.00.

     

    SECTION
      2. PAYMENT OF CONSIDERATION

     

    The
      consideration for the Shares shall be paid to the Corporation upon the
      acceptance of this subscription and a call for payment of consideration. After
      payment of the consideration, a certificate for the Shares shall be issued
      to
      the undersigned as fully paid and nonassessable.

     

    SECTION
      3. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES

     

    The
      undersigned represents and warrants that the undersigned is purchasing the
      Shares for investment and not with a view to distribution.

     

    SECTION
      4. SECURITIES LAWS

     

    The
      undersigned understands that the Shares have not been registered under the
      Securities Act of 1933 in reliance upon an exemption from registration. The
      undersigned also understands that the Shares must be held indefinitely, unless
      they are later registered under the Securities Act of 1933 or unless an
      exemption from registration is otherwise available, and that the Corporation
      has
      no obligation to register the Shares. The undersigned agrees that the Shares
      will not be offered, sold, transferred, pledged, or otherwise disposed of
      without registration under the Securities Act of 1933 and applicable state
      securities laws or an opinion of counsel acceptable to the Corporation that
      such
      registration is not required.

     

    SECTION
      5. LEGEND

     

    The
      undersigned understands and agrees that the Certificate for the Shares shall
      bear a legend that the Shares shall not be offered, sold, transferred, pledged,
      or otherwise disposed of without registration under the Securities Act of 1933
      and applicable state securities laws or an opinion of counsel acceptable to
      the
      Corporation that such registration is not required.

     

    
      	 	
              Impact
                Medical Solutions, Inc.

            
	 	 
	 	
              /s/
                Wayne Cockburn

            
	 	
              By:
                ____________________________________

            
	 	
              Wayne
                Cockburn

            
	 	
              President

            


    

     

    The
      foregoing Stock Subscription is hereby accepted by the Corporation.

    


    Freedom
      1, Inc.

    


    /s/
      Virginia K. Sourlis

    By:
      ____________________________________

    Virginia
      K. Sourlis

    President

     

    DATED:
      December 27, 2006
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7273

JAMES CALHOUN-EL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BOBBY P. SHEARIN, Warden,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. 

(1:13-cv-02056-RDB)

Submitted: October 22, 2013 Decided: October 25, 2013

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James A. Calhoun-El, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James A. Calhoun-El appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his civil complaint and deeming that case a “strike” 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2006). We have reviewed the record 

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. Calhoun-El v. Shearin, 

No. 1:13-cv-02056-RDB (D. Md. July 29, 2013). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED, PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 Form 10-K Issuer
  (i)
    
    the Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer as of the
dates and for the periods indicated in the Form 10-K.
 /s/ Larry L. Enterline
    
    /s/ Amy BobbittLarry L. Enterline
Chief Executive Officer
March 11, 2009
    
    Amy Bobbitt
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
March 11, 2009
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

816 CA 10-02268
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

LUANNE DELZER AND JEFFREY FEUERSTEIN, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JILL M. ROZBICKI, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

ARTHUR J. RUMIZEN, BUFFALO, FOR PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS.

THOMAS A. STEFFAN, ALDEN, FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Frank A. Sedita, Jr., J.), entered November 4, 2010. The order granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this action seeking to impose a constructive trust on certain real property, plaintiffs contend that Supreme Court erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. We reject that contention. We note at the outset that defendant in fact sought dismissal of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211, but plaintiffs in opposition characterized defendant’s motion as one “for summary judgment,” and the court treated it as such. We therefore do the same, inasmuch as plaintiffs have thereby waived any objection to such treatment by their own characterization of the motion ( cf. CPLR 3211 [c]). On the merits, it is well settled that “[a] constructive trust may be imposed when property has been acquired in such circumstances that the holder of the legal title may not in good conscience retain the beneficial interest” ( Potter v Davie , 275 AD2d 961, 963; see Sharp v Kosmalski , 40 NY2d 119, 121). “In order to invoke the court’s equity powers, plaintiff[s] must show a confidential or fiduciary relationship, a promise, a transfer in reliance thereon, a breach of the promise, and defendant’s unjust enrichment” ( Potter , 275 AD2d at 963; see Scivoletti v Marsala , 97 AD2d 401, 402, affd 61 NY2d 806). In support of her motion, defendant acknowledged the confidential relationship but established as a matter of law that there was no promise, no transfer in reliance on the alleged promise, no breach of the alleged promise, and no unjust enrichment on defendant’s part, and plaintiffs failed to raise a-2- 816 CA 10-02268

triable issue of fact to defeat the motion ( see generally Zuckerman v City of New York , 49 NY2d 557, 562).

Entered: June 17, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan Clerk of the Court
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.
 Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
 AGENCY: Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.
 ACTION: List of applications for special permits.
 SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations (49 CFR Part 107, Subpart B), notice is hereby given that the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety has received the application described herein. Each mode of transportation for which a particular special permit is requested is indicated by a number in the “Nature of Application” portion of the table below as follows: 1—Motor vehicle, 2—Rail freight, 3—Cargo vessel, 4—Cargo aircraft only, 5—Passenger-carrying aircraft.
 DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 13, 2012.
 ADDRESS COMMENTS TO: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590. Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the applications are available for inspection in the Records Center, East Building, PHH-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SW., Washington, DC or at 
                        *http://regulations.gov*. This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is published in accordance with part 107 of the Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)). Issued in Washington, DC, on January 6, 2012. Donald Burger, Chief, General Approvals and Permits.
 New Special Permits
Application No.
Docket No.
Applicant
Regulation(s) affected
Nature of special permits thereof15519-N

KMG Electronic Chemicals Pueblo, CO
49 CFR 107.102(c)(4) IP Code 15
To authorize the transportation of IBCs used to carry UN2031 with more than 55% nitric acid without replacing the rigid lastic inner receptacle every 2 years. (mode 1)15532-N

SET Environmental Inc. Wheeling, IL
49 CFR 173.244
To authorize the one-time, one-way transportaion in commerce of one irregulary shaped sodium dispersion vessels in alternative packaging. (mode 1)


[FR Doc. 2012-494 Filed 1-12-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4909-60-M