alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Elinor Chechak GARDNER, n/k/a Elinore Chechak, Appellant, v. Robert A. GARDNER, Appellee.

No. 88-0708.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 23, 1988.

Martin L. Haines, III, and K. Dian Fedak of Martin L. Haines, III, P.A., North Palm Beach, for appellant.

Gary S. Israel, Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand with direction to specify the number of hours and the hourly rate used in calculating the former wife’s reasonable attorney’s fees awarded in connection with the post-dissolution modification proceedings. *Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe,*472 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1985); *Boyle v. Boyle,*485 So.2d 879 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

GLICKSTEIN, WALDEN and STONE, JJ., concur.
#### Viola JOSEPH v. FLUOR CONSTRUCTORS, INC. and the Hartford Accident Indemnity Company.

No. 87-C-0017.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 30, 1987.

In re Joseph, Viola; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 86 CA 372; Parish of St. James, 23rd Judicial District Court, Div. “A”, No. 16666.

Denied.
#### James D. KISER and Donald E. Strain v. PARISH OF JEFFERSON.

No. 86-C-2442.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 23, 1987.

In re Jefferson Par. of; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 86-CA-259; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “H”, No. 294-653.

Prior report: La.App., 498 So.2d 115.

Denied.

CALOGERO, DENNIS and MARCUS, JJ., would grant the writ.
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement of Medical Technology & Innovations, Inc. on Form S-8 (No. 33-27610-A)
of our report dated November 25, 1997 on the consolidated financial statements
of Medical Technology & Innovations, Inc. and subsidiaries which expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to a going
concern uncertainty appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Medical
Technology & Innovations, Inc. for the year ended June 30, 1997.

                                       /s/ SIMON LEVER & COMPANY

Lancaster, Pennsylvania
December 3, 1997
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.79
 AMENDMENT TO  INSTALLMENT LOAN MARKETING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
     1.
    
    Clauses (a)(i) and (ii) of Section 1 of the Marketing Agreement are hereby
amended and restated to read in their entirety as follows:(i) are located in the States of California, Arkansas or Pennsylvania (the
Market), (ii) are designated by ACE, in its sole discretion, and with
respect to retail locations in California, are approved by BANK,.2.
    
    The first sentence of Section 2(a) of the Marketing Agreement is hereby amended
and restated to read in its entirety as follows:ACE shall perform all services reasonably required to market and service the Loans
made by BANK at a minimum of 65 ACE Designated Locations, where Loan applicants
(Applicants) may submit Loan applications (Applications) and
receive disclosures required by applicable Laws and where Borrowers may execute and
deliver Loan documentation and deliver Borrower Checks, Borrower Authorizations or
other payment on the Loans.3.
    
    The first sentence of Section 5(b) of the Marketing Agreement is hereby amended
and restated to read in its entirety as follows:If ACE determines that it can profitably engage in installment loan or deferred
deposit transactions in any of the States of California, Arkansas or Pennsylvania
independent of BANK, then ACE, in its sole discretion upon sixty (60) days notice to
BANK, may elect to modify this Agreement to remove such State from the definition of
Market.4.
    
    Paragraph 5 of Exhibit A to the Marketing Agreement is hereby amended and
restated to read in its entirety as follows:5. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED




---



##### 



FIRST BANK OF DELAWARE
    
    
    
    ACE CASH EXPRESS, INC.By:
    
    /s/ ALONZO J. PRIMUS
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ WALTER E. EVANSIts:
    
    Executive Vice President
    
    
    
    Its:
    
    Senior Vice President and
General CounselDate:
    
    July 28, 2006
    
    
    
    Date:
    
    July 28, 2006
 2
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 194** 

In R e: RONALD EVANS, a/k/a Freak, a/k/a Man

- Man ,
Movant.

On Motion for Authorization to File Successive Application. (2:92

- cr - 00163

- 5)

Argued : September 21, 2011 Decided: October 6 , 2011

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Motion granted by un published per curiam opinion.

**ARGUED:** Bryan A. Stevenson, EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE, Montgomery, Alabama, for Ronald Evans. Richard D. Cooke, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for the United States. **ON BRIEF:** Matthew W. Greene, GREENE LAW GROUP PLLC, Springfield, Virginia; Benjamin W. Maxymuk, EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE, Montgomery , Alabama, for Ronald Evans. Neil H. MacBride, United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for the United States.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM :
After a jury convicted Ronald Evans of six narcotics crimes
committed as a juvenile and a criminal conspiracy that extended
for some time after his eighteenth birthday, a judge sentenced him to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
Now, r elying on Graham v. Florida , 130 S. Ct. 2011 (2010), Evans

mo ves for authorization to file a successive habeas application

.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h)(2)

. At oral argument, the G overnment properly acknowledged that in the appropriate case Graham
establishes a previously unavailable rule of constitutional law that app lies retroactive ly on collateral review

. S ee 28 U.S.C.

§ 2244(b)(3)(C), (2)(A) . The Government, however, contends that

t his is not such a case

. Because Evans has made a “prima facie showing” that his “claim relies on a new rule of constitutional
law, ma de retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable , ” id. , we grant
his motion for authorization to file a successive habeas application. We of course do not suggest any view on the
ultimate merits of Evans’ claim.

MOTION GRANTED
# Uradni list C 145/2020

| | ISSN 1977-1045 |
| --- | --- |
| Uradni list
  Evropske unije | C 145 |
| | |
| Slovenska izdaja | Informacije in objave | Letnik 6330. april 2020 |

ISSN 1977-1045

Uradni list

Evropske unije

C 145

Slovenska izdaja

Informacije in objave

Letnik 6330. april 2020

---

| Vsebina | Stran |
| --- | --- |
| | |
| | |
| | Svet |
| 2020/C 145/01 | Sklep Sveta z dne 28. aprila 2020 o imenovanju članov Znanstveno-tehničnega odbora | 1 |

Vsebina

Stran

Svet

2020/C 145/01

Sklep Sveta z dne 28. aprila 2020 o imenovanju članov Znanstveno-tehničnega odbora

1

---

| SL | |
| --- | --- |

SL

---

Svet

| 30.4.2020 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | C 145/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2020

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

C 145/1

---

SKLEP SVETA

z dne 28. aprila 2020

o imenovanju članov Znanstveno-tehničnega odbora

(2020/C 145/01)

SVET EVROPSKE UNIJE JE –

ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti za atomsko energijo in zlasti člena 134(2) Pogodbe,

po posvetovanju z Evropsko komisijo,

ob upoštevanju naslednjega:

| (1) | Svet je s Sklepom z dne 6. novembra 2018 (1) imenoval člane Znanstveno-tehničnega odbora (v nadaljnjem besedilu: odbor) za obdobje od 6. novembra 2018 do 6. novembra 2023. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Svet je s Sklepom z dne 6. novembra 2018 (1) imenoval člane Znanstveno-tehničnega odbora (v nadaljnjem besedilu: odbor) za obdobje od 6. novembra 2018 do 6. novembra 2023.

| (2) | Zaradi smrti Eugenijusa UŠPURASA se je izpraznilo mesto člana odbora. Zato bi bilo treba za preostanek mandata Eugenijusa UŠPURASA imenovati novega člana. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Zaradi smrti Eugenijusa UŠPURASA se je izpraznilo mesto člana odbora. Zato bi bilo treba za preostanek mandata Eugenijusa UŠPURASA imenovati novega člana.

| (3) | Zaradi odstopa Grzegorza WROCHNE se je izpraznilo mesto člana odbora. Zato bi bilo treba za preostanek mandata Grzegorza WROCHNE imenovati novega člana – |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Zaradi odstopa Grzegorza WROCHNE se je izpraznilo mesto člana odbora. Zato bi bilo treba za preostanek mandata Grzegorza WROCHNE imenovati novega člana –

SPREJEL NASLEDNJI SKLEP:

Člen 1

Za člana Znanstveno-tehničnega odbora se za obdobje do 6. novembra 2023 imenujeta Egidijus URBONAVIČIUS in Józef SOBOLEWSKI.

Člen 2

Ta sklep začne veljati na dan sprejetja.

V Bruslju, 28. aprila 2020

Za Svet

Predsednik

G. GRLIĆ RADMAN

---

(1)  Sklep Sveta z dne 6. novembra 2018 o imenovanju članov Znanstveno-tehničnega odbora (UL C 403, 9.11.2018, str. 2).

1

---
**EXHIBIT32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of U.S. Premium Beef, LLC (the Company) onForm 10-Q for the period ended November 26, 2005 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven D. Hunt,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

     (1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

     (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|     |  |                                         |
|-----|--|-----------------------------------------|
| By: |  | /s/ Steven D. Hunt                      |
|     |  | Steven D. Hunt*Chief Executive Officer* |

Date: January 9, 2006
## ZUCKERT SCOUTT 6- 

## RASENBERGER, L.L.P. ATT ::>. l'l 1:.\ q**~** L \ JOHN E. GILLICK 888 Seventeenth Street, Nw, Washington, DC 20006 -3309 T

elephone [ 202 ] 298-8660 Fax [202] 342 -0683 wwwzsrlawcom

Robert Finamore Acting Chief, Foreign Air Carrier Licensing Division 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20590 February 1, 2012 DIRECT DIAL (202)973-7939 jcgillick,(/>zsrlaw.com

Re: Application ofPolskie Linie Lotnicze S.A. (Docket OST-2012- ) Dear Mr. Finamore: On January 30, 2012, Polskie Linie Lotnicze S.A. ("LOT") filed an Application for an Exemption and Amended Foreign Air Carrier Permit in the above referenced docket. We have completed polling and no carrier has objected to the grant of LOT's application. We respectfully request that the Department proceed to grant the requested authority as soon as possible. Sincerely, John E. Gillick Counsel for Polskie Linie Lotnicze S.A. CC to: Service List
#### STATE ex rel. Ronald SCRIVENS v. Hon. James F. McKAY, III, Judge, Sec. H, Parish of Orleans.

No. 87-KH-0859.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1987.

In re Scrivens, Ronald; applying for writ of mandamus; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “H”, No. 239-673.

Denied. Moot. The district court has acted.
Exhibit
32
 
 The
undersigned in their capacities as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Registrant do hereby certify that:
 
 (i)  this report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (ii) information contained in the
report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in
the report.
 
 Date:
March 5, 2009
 
 By:
                    /s/ John F. Norris Jr.John
      F. Norris Jr.Chief
      Executive Officer
 
 Date:
March 5, 2009
 
 By:
                    /s/ John P. GrahamJohn
      P. GrahamChief
      Financial Officer
 
 Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the "Act") this certification
accompanies the Report and shall not, except to the extent required by the Act,
be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Fuel Tech, Inc. and will be retained by
Fuel Tech, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
III

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 308

Congratulating International House on the occasion of its 75th anniversary.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 18, 2000

Mr. GORTON (for himself, Mr. MOYNIHAN, and Mr. ROCKEFELLER) submitted

the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Congratulating International House on the occasion of its

75th anniversary.

Whereas International House at 500 Riverside Drive, New

York City, was founded in 1924 as a residence and program center for graduate students and trainees from all

nations;

Whereas International House was created to allow diverse

peoples from around the world the opportunity to live together in a shared cultural and intellectual environment,

and enable its residents and members to understand and

better appreciate people of divergent backgrounds; and

Whereas in the last 75 years International House has grown

from this fundamental concept to become an internationally recognized institution, serving as a vital resource for
2

•SRES 308 IS

the global academic, business, professional, and artistic

communities: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate commends International

2 House for its distinguished service to the people of the

3 United States and all citizens of the world in the pro4 motion of global understanding and world peace and ex5 tends congratulations to International House on the occa6 sion of its 75th anniversary.

Æ
#### Isabella NOEL, Appellant, v. Bernard SCHONINGER and Howard Schoninger as partners d/b/a Schoninger Enterprises, f/k/a Casto Developers, Appellees.

No. 85-1547.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 13, 1986.

Burton B. Loebl, North Miami Beach, for appellant.

Cohen, Brown, Reed, Ivans & Schwartz and Allen P. Reed, Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant Isabella Noel appeals from a final default judgment entered in favor of the plaintiffs, Bernard and Howard Schoninger, partners in Schoninger Enterprises. We reverse.

The record reflects and it is undisputed that the medical condition of Noel’s husband was grave. It further appears without dispute that, among other deficiencies, counsel for Noel failed to notify her of at least one of her scheduled depositions. Though we appreciate the court’s frustration, the sanction of striking the pleadings and entering a default is too severe where there is no dispute that the reasons for Noel’s nonattendance were her husband’s illness and her counsel’s failure to notify her. *See Beasley v. Girten,*61 So.2d 179 (Fla.1952); *Livingston v. State, Department of Corrections,*481 So.2d 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); *Lazare v. Weiss,*437 So.2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); *Summit Chase Condominium Association v. Protean Investors, Inc.,*421 So.2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); *Zayres Department Stores v. Fingerhut,*383 So.2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

We reverse and remand to the trial court with instructions to reinstate Noel’s counterclaim and her answer. On remand, plaintiff may apply for, and the trial court may impose, less severe sanctions for the discovery abuses. *Zayres Department Stores,*383 So.2d at 266.

Reversed and remanded.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7484
HORACE T. WOODS, III, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE; JOHN B. METZGER, III, Chairman, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-178-3) Submitted: January 22, 1998 Decided: February 4, 1998 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Horace T. Woods, III, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. The district court referred Appellant's complaint to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994), and after considering the allegations raised in the complaint, the magistrate judge recommended dismissal. Appellant received notice that he had twenty days in which to file objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and that failure to object would waive appellate review. However, Appellant failed to file timely objections in the district court. Thus, the district court, after reviewing the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and dismissed the case. Appellant appeals. The filing of timely objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of the report. See United States v. Schronce , 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Because Appellant failed to file objections after receiving notification of the need to file such objections, he waived his right to appellate review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Addison Jet Management, Inc. ) ) ) 

### --------------) Docket No. [To Be Assigned] Judge Richard C. Goodwin
WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT As the parties have reached an agreement in this matter, the complaint filed on April 6, 2012, is hereby withdrawn.
Respectfully submitted, Peter 

### J. Lynch Assistant ChiefCounsel Enforcement Division, AGC-300 

# f By: ./.

7 

## p·Autumn Killingham

,. .Attorney, AGC-300 Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe ChiefCounsel 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 · Telephone: (202) 267-7728 

## ,. - 

# RECEIVED JAN 30 2013 

## HEARING DOCKETCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the foregoing Withdrawal ofComplaint, inthe matter ofAddisonJet Management, Inc., has been mailed this date by via overnight mail to: Gerald P. Shaw Director ofOperations Addison Jet Management, Inc. 7515 Lemmon Avenue Dallas, TX 75209 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, D.C. 20590 The original and one copy was also hand-delivered this date to: Hearing Docket, AGC-430 (Original and one copy) Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 Washington, D.C. 20591 Atten: Hearing Docket Clerk January 30, 2013



## ..
**Exhibit      32.1**

**C2      GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC.**

**OFFICER’S      CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT      TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

**(18      U.S.C. 1350)**

|  | 1. | The                Report is in full compliance with reporting requirements of Section                13(a)                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 operation of the                Corporation. |
|--|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                                            |                                         |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|        |                                                                                 | /s/              Allan C. Silber   |
|   | Allan              Silber                                                       |
|   | Chairman                of the Board and Chief Executive                Officer |

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7484

HORACE T. WOODS, III,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE; JOHN B. METZGER, III,

Chairman,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (CA-97-178-3)

Submitted: January 22, 1998 Decided: February 4, 1998

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Horace T. Woods, III, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. The district court referred

Appellant's complaint to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B) (1994), and after considering the allegations raised

in the complaint, the magistrate judge recommended dismissal.

Appellant received notice that he had twenty days in which to

file objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation

and that failure to object would waive appellate review. However,

Appellant failed to file timely objections in the district court.

Thus, the district court, after reviewing the magistrate judge's

report and recommendation, adopted the magistrate judge's report

and recommendation and dismissed the case. Appellant appeals.

The filing of timely objections to a magistrate judge's report

and recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the

substance of the report. See United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d

91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Because Appellant failed to file objections

after receiving notification of the need to file such objections,

he waived his right to appellate review. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED