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

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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 13, 2015

Order 

November 13, 2015

152489(94)

NEW COVERT GENERATING COMPANY, LLC,

Petitioner-Appellee,

v

COVERT TOWNSHIP,

Respondent-Appellant.

SC: 152489

COA: 320877

Tax Tribunal: 00-399578

__________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of respondent-appellant to extend the 

time for filing its answer to the application for leave to appeal is GRANTED. The 

answer will be accepted as timely filed if submitted on or before December 17, 2015.
June 22, 1999



John W. Henry & Company, Inc.
One Glendinning Place
Westport, Ct. 06880
Attn: Ms. Beth Kenton


         Re:      Management Agreement Renewal
                  Smith Barney Mid-West Futures Fund L.P. II

Dear Ms. Kenton:

We are  writing  with  respect  to  your  management  agreement  concerning  the
commodity pool to which reference is made above (the "Management Agreement"). We
are extending the term of the Management Agreement through June 30, 2000 and all
other provisions of the Management Agreement will remain unchanged.

Please  acknowledge  receipt of this  modification  by signing  one copy of this
letter and returning it to the  attention of Mr. Daniel  Dantuono at the address
above or fax to  212-723-8985.  If you have any  questions  I can be  reached at
212-723-5416.

Very truly yours,

SMITH BARNEY FUTURES MANAGEMENT INC.



By:
         Daniel A. Dantuono
         Chief Financial Officer,
         Director & Treasurer

RECEIVED

JOHN W. HENRY & COMPANY, INC.


By:

Print Name:

DAD/sr
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                      48,013,000
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       1,619,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                411,010,000
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                  1,137,063,000
<ALLOWANCE>                                 13,474,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,662,639,000
<DEPOSITS>                               1,356,326,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                30,482,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         22,827,000
<LONG-TERM>                                 65,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  9,250,000
<COMMON>                                       224,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 178,530,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>           1,662,639,000
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             87,459,000
<INTEREST-INVEST>                           24,391,000
<INTEREST-OTHER>                             1,930,000
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                           113,780,000
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          45,687,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          50,744,000
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       63,036,000
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                4,300,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                           (113,000)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             49,003,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             30,564,000
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                  20,009,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                20,009,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .86
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.22
<LOANS-NON>                                  7,021,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   686,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                            12,443,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                6,770,000
<RECOVERIES>                                 3,501,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                           13,474,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                        13,474,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
#### Andre Kevin ROSEMOND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. David BRUCK; Robert Lominack; Donald Morgan; Lawrence Cantey, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-7008.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 15, 2002.

Decided Aug. 26, 2002.

Andre Kevin Rosemond, Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Andre Kevin Rosemond appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Rosemond v. Brack,*No. CA-01-4332-0-23-BD (D.S.C. June 11, 2002). 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.*
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the co urt has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limit ed circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 94-60620

No. 94-60651

(Summary Calendar)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHARLES M. BOWNDS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

(3:94 CR 50 3 BN)

April 29, 1997

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

This is a consolidated appeal. Charles M. Bownds was charged in three counts of a five-count

indictment for conspiring to possess and transfer two machine guns in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371,

922( o )(1), and 924(a)(2) (Count 1); aiding and abetting t he possession of two machine guns in2

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 922( o )(1), and 924(a)(2) (Count 2); and aiding and abetting the transfer

of two machine guns in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 922( o )(1), and 924(a)(2) (Count 3).

Bownds filed two pretrial motions. First, he moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground

that § 922( o ) violated the Tenth Amendment as an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’s Commerce

Clause power. Second, Bownds moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that his rights to

a speedy trial were violated. The district court denied Bownds’s second motion, but granted his first

motion, declaring § 922( o ) unconstitutional on Commerce Clause grounds.

The Government appealed the district court’s dismissal of the indictment (case number 94-

60620) and Bownds appealed the district court’s denial of his speedy trial motion (case number 94-

60651). We consolidated the two cases because they presented issues that are intertwined.

DISPOSITION

As to case number 94-60620, we REVERSE the district court’s conclusion that § 922( o ) is

unconstitutional, reinstate the indictment, and REMAND for further proceedings. United States v.

Kirk

, 105 F.3d 997 (5th Cir. 1997) (en banc) (a ffirming, by en equally divided en banc court, the

three-judge panel opinion upholding the constitutionality of § 922( o )).

As to case number 94-60651, we DISMISS the appeal because the denial of a motion to

dismiss an indictment on speedy trial grounds is not an appealabl e order. S ee United States v.

MacDonald

, 435 U.S. 850, 856-57 (1978); United St at es v. Crawford Enterprises, Inc. , 754 F.2d

1272, 1273 (5th Cir. 1985); United States v. Bailey

, 512 F.2d 833, 837-38 (5th Cir.), cert. dismissed

,

423 U.S. 1039 (1975).
Exhibit 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Kronos Advanced Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended September 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

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 operation of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authentications, 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 Kronos Advanced
Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by Kronos Advanced Technologies, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.



    /s/ Daniel R. Dwight
--------------------------------------
Daniel R. Dwight
President and Chief Executive Officer


   /s/ Richard A. Papworth
--------------------------------------
Richard A. Papworth
Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1

                                                                 EXHIBIT 21.1



                           SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

NAME OF SUBSIDIARY          STATE OR JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION          PERCENTAGE
-------------------         ---------------------------------------         ----------
OWNED
----
<S>                                         <C>                                 <C>
Commodore Solution

Technologies, Inc.                           Delaware                             100%

Commodore CFC
Technologies, Inc.                           Delaware                             100%

CFC Technologies, Inc.                       Ohio                                 100%

Commodore Advanced
Sciences, Inc.*                              New Mexico                           100%

A.S. Environmental, Inc.*                    Delaware                             100%

Commodore Remediation
Technologies, Inc.*                          Delaware                             100%

Commodore Government
Environmental
Technologies, Inc.*                          Delaware                             100%

Commodore Technologies, Inc.*                Ohio                                 100%

Sandpiper Properties, Inc.*                  Ohio                                 100%

Environmental Alternatives, Inc.*            New Mexico                           100%

Advanced Sciences Integrated
Mexico, S.A. de C.V.*                        Mexico                               100%

Advanced Sciences Integradas S.A.*           Argentina                            100%

CORT Technologies, Inc.*                     Delaware                             100%

Commodore Refrigerant
Technologies, Inc.                           Delaware                             100%
</TABLE>

*  Wholly owned subsidiary of Commodore Solution Technologies, Inc.
April 1st, 2013

Sirs

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20590

REF. Comments in Support of Resolution 787

To Whom It May Concern,

By means of the following communication, we want to confirm that Lineas Aereas Costarricenses, S.A. and 

Avianca and TACA Airlines, support IATA ́s Resolution 787 – termed as New Distribution Capability – NDCtaking into account that it constitutes an updated data transmission standard based on XML, and thus it will 

make it easier, faster and more economic to provide the customer with more information about fare 

alternatives, ancillary services, on board amenities and graphics such as pictures and seat maps.

Given the fact that NDC will further include new technology using messaging through XML based protocols and 

web services that will enable transparency and consistency in airline pricing, products and services across all 

channels and greater customer personalization and offering in the shopping process, we consider that we 

should support the initiative. 

In addition to the above, it is important to bear in mind that carriers and travel agents need real time dynamics 

that allow interactive contact with their customers; and through the use of NDC, it seems that we will be able 

to avoid current constraints with existing EDIFACT messages.

NDC will also enable a dynamic distribution model that will provide a better access to distribution channels for 

providers and customers that is currently possible only through the airlines’ own websites.

Yours sincerely, 

Mario Zamora

President and General Manager

Mario.zamora@aviancataca.com

Lineas Aereas Costarricenses, S.A.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.0




                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-91525, 333-79965, and 333-00000) pertaining to the SMC Cash
Accumulation Plan, The 1999 Director and Senior Management Stock Purchase Plan
of SCPIE Holdings, Inc., and The SCPIE Holdings Inc. Employees Stock Purchase
Plan, respectively, of our report dated February 21, 2000, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule included in its Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1999.



                                               /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Los Angeles, California
March 24, 2000
BANK PLUS CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

                              COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE
                            (Dollars in thousands, except per common share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                              ---------------------------------------------
                                                                  2000            1999             1998
                                                              -------------   -------------   -------------
<S>                                                           <C>             <C>             <C>
Earnings from continuing operations .......................   $     31,490    $     34,769    $      8,966
Discontinued Operations:
   Loss from operations ...................................         (7,344)        (59,659)        (65,294)
   Loss on disposal .......................................        (60,926)             --              --
                                                              -------------   -------------   -------------

Net loss ..................................................   $    (36,780)   $    (24,890)   $    (56,328)
                                                              =============   =============   =============
Continuing operations:
   Basic ..................................................   $       1.62    $       1.79    $       0.46
   Diluted ................................................           1.62            1.77            0.45
Discontinued operations:
   Basic ..................................................          (3.51)          (3.07)          (3.36)
   Diluted ................................................          (3.51)          (3.03)          (3.31)
Total:
   Basic ..................................................          (1.89)          (1.28)          (2.90)
   Diluted ................................................          (1.89)          (1.26)          (2.86)
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
   Basic ..................................................     19,470,400      19,460,941      19,395,337
   Effect of dilutive securities-- stock options ..........         14,453         214,543         317,785
   Effect of dilutive securities-- deferred stock awards ..         13,538           2,025             825
                                                              -------------   -------------   -------------

Diluted ...................................................     19,498,391      19,677,509      19,713,947
                                                              =============   =============   =============
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.2
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Thomas C. Chesterman, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Aradigm Corporation;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.                                    /s/ THOMAS C. CHESTERMAN   Thomas C. Chesterman   *Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer*   
Dated: March 30, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   600
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,017
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           504
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,596
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,017
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   650
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (650)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (650)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2079 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2079

To repeal the prohibition against State restrictions on communications 
                between government agencies and the INS.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 16, 1996

 Mr. Moynihan introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal the prohibition against State restrictions on communications 
                between government agencies and the INS.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF THE PROHIBITION AGAINST STATE RESTRICTIONS ON 
              COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THE INS.

Section 434 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 
1996 (Public Law 104-193) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```