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

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

129222 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 129222 

 COA: 262026 

Calhoun CC: 04-001719-FH 

JAMES WYATT BOOTH,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 21, 2005 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s1121 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

November 29, 2005 

Clerk
**Exhibit 32****Residential Capital, LLC****Certification of Principal Executive Officer and PrincipalFinancial Officer****Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**In connection with the Quarterly Report of Residential Capital,LLC (the Company) onForm 10-Q for theperiod ending June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each ofthe undersigned officers of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of theSarbanes-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/ James G. Jones James G. JonesChief Executive OfficerAugust 6, 2007/s/ Sanjiv Khattri Sanjiv KhattriChief Financial OfficerAugust 6, 2007
# L_2009320EN.01003501.xml

| 5.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 320/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 320/35

---

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 954/2006 of 27 June 2006 imposing definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or steel originating in Croatia, Romania, Russia and Ukraine, repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2320/97 and (EC) No 348/2000, terminating the interim and expiry reviews of the anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or non-alloy steel originating, inter alia, in Russia and Romania and terminating the interim reviews of the anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or non-alloy steel originating, inter alia, in Russia and Romania and in Croatia and Ukraine

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 175 of 29 June 2006
  )

On page 36, footnote No 17:

for:

‘... IIW doc. IX-535-67, ...’,

read:

‘... IIW doc. IX-555-67, ...’.

---
Exhibit 32
                    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 Souvall-Page and Company, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Quarterly Report"), we, David C. Merrell, President and director, and Todd D.
Ross, Secretary/Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

     (1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Company.

Dated: 11/14/05                          /s/David C. Merrell
       --------                          ---------------------------
                                         David C. Merrell
                                         President and director

Dated: 11/14/05                          /s/Todd D. Ross
      ---------                          ---------------------------
                                         Todd D. Ross
                                         Secretary/Treasurer and director
Collection Activity

Number of 

Respondents

Number of 

Responses 

per Party

Total Number 

of Responses

Time per 

Response

Cost per 

Response 

(Dollars)

Total 

Hours

Total Cost 

(Dollars)

80.1450 - Registration

(a) at $103/hour 950 1 950 8 824 7600 782800

CDX Registration 700 1 700 2 206 1400 144200

TOTALS 1650 1650 9000 927000

Information Collection Burden by Type of Party

Table IV - Any Party Who Owns/Intends to Own RINS (including blenders, brokers, marketers, etc.)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-1295 KHADIJAH MUHAMMAD, singly and as next friend to, Plaintiff - Appellant, and ALYSHA S. PERKINS, a minor, Plaintiff, versus GUARDIAN CORPORATION, d/b/a Hardee's of Cross Lanes, West Virginia, the parent company of Hardee's, Defendant - Appellee, and HARDEE'S OF CROSS LANES, WEST VIRGINIA, Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-890-2) Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 3, 1996 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.23 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Khadijah Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se. Bryan Rex Cokeley, STEPTOE & JOHNSON, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant app eals from the district court's order denying leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Muhammad v. Hardee's Cross Lanes , No. CA-94-890-2 (S.D.W. Va. Jan. 31, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. We deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this court.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 10.2

May 1, 2009

James Young

Chief Financial
Officer

GMAC Mortgage, LLC

One Meridian Crossings

Suite 100

Minneapolis, MN 55423



|Re: | Amendment of ISDA Schedules
|--- | ---------------------------

Dear Jim:

This letter will confirm the details of the agreement between GMAC Bank (the Bank) and GMAC Mortgage, LLC (GMACM) to amend the Schedules (Net
Funding and FMV) dated as of August 31, 2007 (collectively, the Schedules) to the ISDA Master Agreement between the Bank and GMACM (the Agreement).

The Bank and GMACM hereby agree that, as of the date of this letter, the Schedules shall be amended as follows:

Part 6,
Sub-section (a)(vi) of the FMV Schedule shall read in its entirety as follows:

Termination Date, unless earlier
terminated in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement or by agreement of the parties, means a date established upon 90 days prior notice given by Party B.

Part 6, Sub-section (a)(vii) of the Net Funding Schedule shall read in its entirety as follows:

Termination
Date, unless earlier terminated in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement or by agreement of the parties, means a date established upon 90 days prior notice given by Party B.

Except as otherwise set specifically set forth above, the Agreement and the Schedules shall remain in full force and effect without modification or amendment.



---

If the foregoing is consistent with your understanding of the agreement between GMACM and the Bank, please return an
executed copy of this letter to my attention.



|                                                                     
|---------------------------------------------------------------------
|Very truly yours,                                                    
|                                                                     
|GMAC BANK                                                            
|                                                                     
|/s/ Robert E. Groody                                                 
|Robert E. Groody Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer
|                                                                     
|ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO:                                              
|                                                                     
|GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC                                                   
|                                                                     
|/s/ James Young                                                      
|James Young Chief Financial
Officer
Third Amendment to Amended and Restated Addendum



 Exhibit 10.7 
 THIRD AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED 
 ADDENDUM TO DISTRIBUTOR FRANCHISE AGREEMENT

 This Third Amendment to Amended and Restated Addendum to Distributor Franchise Agreement (“Third Amendment”) is entered into
this 24th day of March, 2006, by and between CITGO Petroleum Corporation (“CITGO”) and The Pantry, Inc. (the “Company”). 
 WHEREAS, CITGO and the Company have entered into a Distributor Franchise Agreement on or about August, 2000 (the “DFA”); 
 WHEREAS, CITGO and the Company have entered into an Amended and Restated Addendum to that DFA on February 11, 2003, (the “Addendum”); a First Amendment to Amended and Restated Addendum to DFA on march 31, 2005, (the
“First Amendment”); a Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Addendum to DFA on October 11, 2005; and 
 WHEREAS, CITGO and
the Company desire to add an additional terminal to Section 3 of the Addendum; 
 NOW, THEREFORE in consideration of the premises and
covenants contained herein, it is agreed that Section 3 shall be changed as follows: 
  

	 	1.	The following terminals shall be added to the list of terminals in Section 3, for which the pricing formula set forth in Section 4 applies: 

 “Niceville, FL” 
 The effective
date of this Third Amendment is March 1, 2006. Other than as amended herein, all other provisions of the Addendum, First Amendment, and Second Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Third Amendment was executed on the date above written. 
  

					
	CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION	  		  	THE PANTRY, INC.
			
	 /s/ Barry Fulda
	  		  	 /s/ Steven J. Ferreira

	(Signature)	  		  	(Signature)
	Barry Fulda	  		  	Steven J. Ferreira
	(Printed Name)	  		  	(Printed Name)
	General Mgr. Business Analysis & Enhancement	  		  	Senior Vice President, Administration
	(Title)	  		  	(Title)
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 6306

KENNETH KENNEDY SHANNON , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. C. MICHAEL LAIRD; BRANDAN MCSHEEHY, Special Agent Drug Enforcement Agency ( “ DEA ” ); DAVID LESLIE, T.F.O.; CHRIS OKSALA, Group Supervisor , D

. E

. A

. ; SEAN MCMICKING, Special Agent D

. E

. A

. ; JAMES DUFFY, Special Agent D

. E

. A

. ; JAKE GRILL, City of Charleston Police Dept. T.F.O.; REARNY VANN, Dorchester County Sheriff ’ s Office T.F.O.; JONATHAN HOFF, City of Charleston Police Dept. T.F.O.; ROD RAPE, Special Agent D

. E

. A

. ; CHAUNCY SOLOMON, T.F.O. , Defendants

- Appellees

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Charleston

. David C. Norton, District Judge. ( 2:22

- cv - 04318

- DCN )

Submitted : October 31, 2023 Decided: December 8, 2023

Before AGEE, THACKER, and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Kenneth Kennedy Shanno n, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6306 Doc: 11 Filed: 12/08/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Kennedy Shannon appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Shannon’s civil rights complaint. Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Shannon’s informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”), we find no reversible error. * Accordingly, we affirm the district court ’s order

. Shannon v. Laird , No. 2:22

- cv - 04318

- DCN (D.S.C. Feb. 28, 2023; Mar. 9, 2023) . 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

* To the extent Shannon challenges on appeal the characterization of his claims, he waived appellate review by failing to object to this aspect of the magistrate judge’s recommendation after being warned of the consequences of failing to file specific objections

. See Martin v. Duffy , 858 F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 846

- 47 (4th Cir. 1985). USCA4 Appeal: 23-6306 Doc: 11 Filed: 12/08/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
NUMBER 13-12-00365-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

WILLIAMS FARMS PRODUCE SALES, INC., Appellant,

v.

R & G PRODUCE COMPANY, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

of Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

ORDER

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

On March 28, 2014, appellant, Williams Farms Produce Sales, Inc., filed a notice 

of bankruptcy in this appeal. According to the notice, appellant filed a bankruptcy petition 

on March 7, 2014, in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the District of South Carolina. 

Upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition, an automatic stay becomes effective which 

prohibits the commencement or continuation of any judicial action or proceeding against
2

the debtor and any property within the debtor's bankruptcy estate. See 11 U.S.C.A. § 

362(a). Pursuant to Rule 8.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the appeal is 

suspended. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2. 

Accordingly, this appeal is ABATED until further order of this Court. Any 

documents filed subsequent to the bankruptcy petition will remain pending until the appeal 

is reinstated. The parties are directed to take such action as is appropriate to advise the 

Court of any change in the status of the bankruptcy proceeding which would affect the 

status of this appeal, including but not limited to, the filing of a motion to reinstate pursuant 

to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 8.3. See id. 8.3.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

2nd day of April, 2014.
EXHIBIT 32.1


                           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Vital Products, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report for the quarter ended January 31, 2008 (the "Form 10-QSB")
of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the
Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Michael Levine
------------------------
By:  Michael Levine
Chief Executive Officer


/s/ Henry Goldberg
------------------------
By: Henry Goldberg
Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

April 23, 2008

<PAGE>
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2163 

To suspend temporarily the duty on poly(styrene) sulfonic acid. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. CASEY) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on poly(styrene) sulfonic 

acid. 

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

3 SECTION 1. POLY(STYRENE) SULFONIC ACID. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Poly(styrene) sulfonic acid 

(CAS No. 69011–20–7) (provided for in subheading 

3914.00.60) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2163 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
# L_2006014EN.01001401.xml

| 19.1.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 14/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 14/14

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 84/2006

of 18 January 2006

amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (1), and in particular Article 9(1)(a) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 lists the natural and legal persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 lists the natural and legal persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

| (2) | On 14 December 2005, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council amended the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply. Annex I should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 14 December 2005, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council amended the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply. Annex I should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 is hereby amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 January 2006.

For the Commission

Eneko LANDÁBURU

Director-General of External Relations

---

(1)  
  OJ L 193, 23.7.2005, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1824/2005 (OJ L 294, 10.11.2005, p. 3).

1

---

ANNEX

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 is amended as follows:

The entry ‘Dr Ignace Murwanashy-Aka (alias Ignace). Nationality: Rwandan. Other information: President of FDLR. Resident in Germany’ shall be replaced by the following:

Dr Ignace Murwanashyaka (alias Ignace). Date of birth: 14.5.1963. Place of birth: Butera, Rwanda. Nationality: Rwandan. Other information: President of FDLR. Resident in Germany.

---
#### The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellant, v. Daniel G. BROWNFIELD, Appellee.

No. S-85-438.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

May 20, 1986.

Ray Edelstein, Dist. Atty., Poteau, for appellant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BRETT, Judge:

Appellant, Daniel G. Brownfield, entered an oral Motion to Quash on the day of trial in LeFlore County, in Case No. CRF-85-438 and the District Judge Sustained the motion; from that ruling, the State brings this appeal. 22 O.S.1981, § 1053.

The appellant in this case was charged in the preliminary information with First Degree Manslaughter; the underlying misde*461meanor was driving under the influence of intoxicants. The magistrate bound appellant over for trial, but directed the prosecutor to reflect in the formal information that the underlying misdemeanor was running a stop sign rather than driving under the influence, which was done. On the day of trial appellant filed an oral motion to quash the information. The argument in favor of the motion was that the information did not state facts to support a charge of First Degree Manslaughter. *Short v. State,*560 P.2d 219 (Okl.Cr.1977). The district judge gave the prosecutor a chance to amend the information to charge appellant with negligent homicide. Appellant advised the court that he was ready to go to trial if the prosecutor would amend the information. The district attorney refused and advised the trial court he would appeal that ruling.

The State has not presented for review by this Court the issue that was before the trial court. The only question we are asked to consider is the propriety of the trial court entertaining an oral motion to quash after appellant had already pled not guilty to the information. The objection relates to the motion not being in writing or verified and to the motion being filed too late in the proceedings. The State did not object to the form of the motion at the time it was entered. The only objection voiced was to the substance of the motion and the short notice. In response to the short notice, the court delayed ruling on the motion for several days to give the district attorney an opportunity to respond.

This issue has been answered by this Court in *State v. Edens,*565 P.2d 51 (Okl. Cr.1977). In that case, as in the instant case, the State did not object to the form in which the motion was presented until it was appealed. The State has waived the objection so the issue is moot. Further, since the State has not presented the issue of the sufficiency of the information for review it will not be addressed. Judgment AFFIRMED.

PARKS, P.J., and BUSSEY, J., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906  OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection  with the  Quarterly  Report  on Form 10-Q of  Newkirk  Realty  Trust,  Inc.;
(the  Registrant)  for  the  period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  Report),
I, Michael L. Ashner,  Chief Executive  Officer of the Manager  of the Registrants
General Partner,  certify,  pursuant to 18  U.S.C.  section 1350,  as adopted,  pursuant
to section 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 Registrant.
| | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|By:   | /s/ Michael L. Ashner   | 
|----- | ----------------------- | 
|      |                         | 
|Name: | Michael L. Ashner       | 
|      | Chief Executive Officer | 

Date: May 9, 2006

38