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

| 1. | The      quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Grande Communications Holdings, Inc. for      the three months ended September 30, 2008 filed on the date hereof with      the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 Grande      Communications Holdings, Inc. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      November 10, 2008 |   | /s/    ROY H. CHESTNUTT                                       |
|------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                         |   | Roy      H. Chestnutt                                                             |
|                         |   | President,      Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of    Directors |

| Date:      November 10, 2008 |   | /s/    MICHAEL L. WILFLEY |
|------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                         |   | Michael      L. Wilfley                       |
|                         |   | Chief      Financial Officer                  |

----
107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 385

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Secretary of Health and Human Services should

conduct or support research on certain tests toscreen for ovarian cancer, and Federal healthcare programs and group and individual healthplans should cover the tests if demonstrated tobe effective, and for other purposes.

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 385

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas ovarian cancer is a serious and underrecognized

threat to women’s health;

Whereas ovarian cancer, the deadliest of the gynecologic cancers, is the fourth leading cause of cancer death among

women in the United States;

Whereas ovarian cancer occurs in 1 out of 57 women in the

United States;
2

•HCON 385 EH

Whereas approximately 50 percent of the women in the

United States diagnosed with ovarian cancer die as a result of the cancer within 5 years;

Whereas ovarian cancer is readily treatable when it is detected in the beginning stages before it has spread beyond the ovaries, but the vast majority of cases are not

diagnosed until the advanced stages when the cancer has

spread beyond the ovaries;

Whereas in cases where ovarian cancer is detected in the beginning stages, more than 90 percent of women survive

longer than 5 years;

Whereas only 25 percent of ovarian cancer cases in the

United States are diagnosed in the beginning stages;

Whereas in cases where ovarian cancer is diagnosed in the

advanced stages, the chance of 5-year survival is only

about 25 percent; and

Whereas ovarian cancer may be difficult to diagnose because

symptoms are easily confused with other diseases and because there is no reliable, easy-to-administer screening

tool: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that—

3 (1) the Secretary of Health and Human Serv4 ices, acting through the Director of the National In5 stitutes of Health—

6 (A) should conduct or support research on

7 the effectiveness of the medical screening tech8 nique of using proteomic patterns in blood

9 serum to identify ovarian cancer, including the
3

•HCON 385 EH

1 effectiveness of using the technique in combina2 tion with other screening methods for ovarian

3 cancer; and

4 (B) should continue to conduct or support

5 other promising ovarian cancer research that

6 may lead to breakthroughs in screening tech7 niques;

8 (2) the Secretary should submit to the Congress

9 a report on the research described in paragraph

10 (1)(A), including an analysis of the effectiveness of

11 the medical screening technique for identifying ovar12 ian cancer; and

13 (3) if the research demonstrates that the med14 ical screening technique is effective for identifying

15 ovarian cancer, Federal health care programs and

16 group and individual health plans should cover the

17 technique.

Passed the House of Representatives July 22, 2002.

Attest:

Clerk.
AMENDMENT TO SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT



This Amendment to Subscription Agreement is entered into as of June 16, 2005 with reference to the following: 



WHEREAS, MERCATOR MOMENTUM FUND, LP, MERCATOR MOMENTUM FUND III, LP, AND MONARCH POINTE FUND, LTD., (collectively, the “Funds”) and M.A.G. CAPITAL, LLC, (formerly known as MERCATOR ADVISORY GROUP, LLC) (“M.A.G.”) (the Funds and M.A.G. are referred to individually as a “Holder” and collectively as the “Holders”), and M-Wave, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) previously entered into that certain Subscription Agreement dated June 17, 2004 (the “Agreement”); and 



WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement;



NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows:



1.                 Paragraph 7(b) is deleted in its entirety and the following is inserted:  



“Volume Limitation.   Purchasers and MAG, on behalf of themselves and their affiliates, hereby covenant and agree not to, directly or indirectly, sell in the aggregate during any trading day shares of Common Stock totaling more than 20% of the total shares of Common Stock traded on such day.”



2.                 In all other respects, the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.


	

 






 



Signature



 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed and delivered by the parties hereto as of the date first above written.



M-Wave, INC.



 



By: /s/ Jim Mayer                                                    



Name: Jim Mayer                                                   



Its: CEO                                                                 



 



MERCATOR MOMENTUM FUND, L.P.








By:  M.A.G. CAPITAL, LLC

Its:  General Partner










By:                                                                         




Name:  David Firestone




Its:        Managing Member





MERCATOR MOMENTUM FUND III, L.P.








By: M.A.G. CAPITAL, LLC



Its: General Partner








 



By:                                                                         




Name: David Firestone




Its:       Managing Member








MONARCH POINTE FUND, LTD. 










By:                                                                         




Name: David Firestone




Its:       President 



 






M.A.G. CAPITAL, LLC










By:                                                                         




Name: David Firestone




Its:       Managing Member
#### Earl RUTLEDGE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. BE-21.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 29, 1986.

Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, and Kenneth D. Driggs, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Norma J. Mungenast, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from a judgment of conviction and sentence entered in Alachua County Circuit Court. We find no merit in defendant’s first contention, which addresses the conviction. We affirm the conviction.

The defendant’s second contention is that the trial court erroneously scored the defendant’s prior misdemeanor convictions under Section III. B. of the scoresheet as “[p]rior conviction[s] for Category 6 offenses.” It is improper to calculate prior *180misdemeanor convictions as same-category offenses. *See The Florida Bar Amendment to Rules of Criminal Procedure,*451 So.2d 824 (Fla.1984), regarding the comment following Rule 3.701(d)(5), and *Bordeaux v. State,*471 So.2d 1353 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The trial court below awarded 30 points for six Category 6 offenses, four of which were misdemeanor convictions. We find that it was improper for the trial court to include the four misdemeanor convictions under Section III. B. in calculating defendant’s scoresheet.

Accordingly, defendant’s sentence is reversed and remanded for resentencing, eliminating the misdemeanor convictions from the sentencing calculations.

BOOTH, C.J., and SMITH and WENT-WORTH, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit32.2**

**INTERLINEBRANDS, INC.**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Interline Brands, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ending June 29, 2007 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas J. Tossavainen, ChiefFinancial Officer 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)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|    /S/ Thomas J.  Tossavainen |   |
|----------------------------------------------|--------|
| Thomas J. Tossavainen                        |
| Chief Financial Officer                      |
| August 3, 2007                               |

 

----
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302(a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Samuel Masucci, III, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the MacroShares $100 Oil Up Trust;

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 other certifying officer 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, 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 other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors, the board of managers of Macro Securities Depositor, LLC, and the audit committee of MacroMarkets LLC (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 persons who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: February 17, 2009

| |                                                              
| | -------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ SAMUEL MASUCCI, III                                      
| | Samuel Masucci, III                                          
| | Chief Executive Officer of Depositor, on behalf of
Registrant
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 279 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 279

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Whereas among the first military units to make this transition to 
            wartime operations was the USS Enterprise Battle Group, 
            which, on September 11, 2001, while en route back to the 
            United States from a scheduled peacetime deployment, was 
            immediately redeployed to conduct operations against 
            terrorists;
    Whereas elements of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps 
            began deploying to the theater of war to secure bases and 
            support combat operations as early as September 19, 2001; 
            and
    Whereas since then, not only have the special operations and 
            conventional forces of all the services performed 
            magnificently, but the members of the Armed Forces have 
            repeatedly demonstrated an extraordinary level of 
            commitment and professionalism: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress recognizes and commends the excellent service of all 
in the Armed Forces who are prosecuting the war to end terrorism and 
protecting the security of the Nation.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 20, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
107th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            H. CON. RES. 279

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

  Recognizing and commending the excellent service of members of the 
     Armed Forces who are prosecuting the war to end terrorism and 
                 protecting the security of the Nation.
```
[No. 35380-2-I.

Division One.

July 22, 1996.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Forest E. Wade, *Respondent.*

Appeal .from a judgment of the Superior Court for What-com County, No. 94-8-00300-1, Frank Morrow, J., entered September 21, 1994. *Reversed*by unpublished opinion per Baker, C.J., concurred in by Agid and Cox, JJ.
#### Harriet BARRISH and Steven Barrish, her husband, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, City of North Miami, Sixth Avenue Properties, Inc., and State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. 85-520.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 19, 1987.

Rehearing Denied July 29, 1987.

Horton, Perse *&*Ginsberg and Arnold Ginsberg; Samuel M. Spatzer, Coral Gables, for appellants.

Colodny, Fass & Talenfeld and Joel Fass, North Miami, Simon, Schindler, Hurst & Sandberg and Thomas M. Pflaum, Walton, Lantaff, Schroeder & Carson, Miami, and G. Bart Billbrough, Coral Gables, for appel-lees.

Before NESBITT, BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See Stahl v. Metropolitan Dade County,*438 So.2d 14 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); *Pope v. Cruise Boat Co.,*380 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

NESBITT and BASKIN, JJ., concur.

FERGUSON, Judge

(specially concurring).

Harriet Barrish was injured when she was struck by a car as she walked in the street because overgrown foliage blocked the sidewalk. Summary judgment was entered for the defendants on a legal determination that the obstruction was not the proximate cause of the injuries. I concur in the result because the case is factually indistinguishable from *Pope v. Cruise Boats Co.,*380 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). But the case is also factually similar to *Stahl v. Metropolitan Dade County,*438 So.2d 14 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), where we reversed a summary judgment for the defendant. In *Stahl*the young victim was injured when he left a bicycle path to avoid an obstruction and was struck by a passing automobile. The difference between this case and *Stahl*is that the young victim in *Stahl*rode a bicycle whereas the victim here was a pedestrian.

It appears then that the liability of a landowner, who negligently obstructs a sidewalk forcing the user to detour onto a highway where she is struck by a passing automobile, may turn on the user’s method of locomotion. If the detour is made by a bicyclist there may be a proximate cause relationship, but if the detour is made by a pedestrian there is no proximate cause relationship as a matter of law. The rationale, I suppose, is that a pedestrian who is forced onto the highway has a greater ability to extricate herself from the peril of an oncoming automobile than has a bicyclist. I cannot subscribe to the “mode of locomotion” theory as adequately distinguishing *341the cases. Either *Pope*or *Stahl*is incorrect.
NO. 07-06-0056-CR IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL B OCTOBER 16, 2006

______________________________ RODGER WAYNE MITCHELL , Appellant

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE 64 TH DISTRIC T COURT O F CASTRO COUNTY; NO. A3024-0506; HON. ROBERT W . KINKAID, JR., PRESIDING

_______________________________ Memorandum Opinion

_______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Rodger Wayne Mitchell (appel lant) appeals hisconv ict ion for b urg lar y of a habitation. He was convicted by a jur y and sentence d to twenty years co nfinement and a fine of $10,000. Appellant ’s appointed cou nsel has filed a motion to wi thdraw, tog ether1 An ders v. C alifornia, 386 U .S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.C t. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (19 67). 2 with an Anders 1 brief, in which he certified that, af ter diligently searching the re cord, t he appeal was w ithout merit. Appellant filed a response on Aug ust 4, 2006. In compliance w ith the princ iples enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel review ed the various stages of the trial and disc ussed sever al potential ar

eas for appeal. However, he adeq uately ex plained why each argument l acks merit. We have also conducted our
own review of the record and appellant’s response to assess the acc ur acy of appellate counsel’s conclusionsand to uncover any error pur

suant to Stafford v. Sta te, 813 S.W.3d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Our own r eview has failed to rev

eal any rev

ersible er ror. Accordingl y, the motion to withdr aw is g ranted, and the j udgment is affirmed.

Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish

.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PRESERVATION OF LOS OLIVOS and

PRESERVATION OF SANTA YNEZ,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

 v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-55486

D.C. No. 

2:06-cv-01502-JVS-SH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 12, 2017** 

Pasadena, California

Before: KOZINSKI, McKEOWN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

The district court correctly denied plaintiffs’ request to reopen this case.

Plaintiffs initially challenged a 2006 decision of the Interior Board of Indian

FILED

JAN 17 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Page 2 of 2

Appeals (IBIA). The district court vacated that decision and remanded the case to

the IBIA, which issued a superseding decision in 2014. Plaintiffs may attempt to

challenge the IBIA’s 2014 decision by filing a new action in the district court, but

they may not do so, as they have attempted to do here, by “reopening” an earlier

action that had already concluded.

Contrary to plaintiffs’ contentions, their initial 2006 action did not remain

pending in the district court after 2008. The district court’s decision of July 9,

2008, which granted in part and denied in part plaintiffs’ motion for summary

judgment, was a final judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(c)(2)(B) (stating that a

judgment is entered after 150 days even if no separate document is filed). The

court’s decision resolved all of the claims raised in plaintiffs’ motion for summary

judgment and remanded the case to the IBIA. A district court generally does not

retain jurisdiction after an action is remanded to an agency. Zheng v. Ashcroft, 383

F.3d 919, 921 n.2 (9th Cir. 2004) (per curiam). Additionally, plaintiffs treated the

decision as a final judgment by seeking attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to

Justice Act. See Casey v. Albertson’s Inc., 362 F.3d 1254, 1259 (9th Cir. 2004).

AFFIRMED.
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 Quarterly Report of American Patriot Financial Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John D. Belew, Chief Executive Officer 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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/ John D. BelewJohn D. BelewChief Executive OfficerMay 16, 2011
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CHRISTOPHER D. BURGESS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 177 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 3rd day of September, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.