alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### D.R. JOHNSON LUMBER COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 02-5094.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

DECIDED: Feb. 7, 2003.

Before MAYER, Chief Judge, CLEVENGER and BRYSON, Circuit Judges.

*907Judgment

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

*AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23



            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


The Board of Directors
OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc.:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on
Form S-8 (No. 333-129749, No. 333-91118, No. 333-65072, No. 333-42274, No.
333-39509, No. 333-06861, No. 33-64713, No. 33-38443) and on Form S-3
(333-124279) of OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and subsidiaries of our reports dated
March 15, 2006, relating to (i) the consolidated balance sheets of OSI
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash
flows, for the year ended December 31, 2005, for the three months ended December
31, 2004, and for each of the two fiscal years in the period ended September 30,
2004, and (ii) management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, and the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, which reports
appear in the December 31, 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of OSI
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Our report described in (ii) above contains an explanatory
paragraph relating to the exclusion of internal control over financial reporting
associated with one entity acquired during 2005 from management's assessment and
our assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
of OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc. as of December 31, 2005.

As discussed in note 1(b) to the consolidated financial statements, the Company
adopted EITF 00-21 "Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables" in fiscal
2004.

As discussed in note 1(j) to the consolidated financial statements, the Company
fully adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.
142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets" in fiscal 2003.




                                       /s/ KPMG LLP



Melville, New York
March 23, 2006
#### Rita RANDLE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28899.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 20, 1957.

*949No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The conviction, on a plea of guilty before the court, is for the sale of whisky in a dry area, two counts; the punishment a fine of $200.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular and nothing is presented for review. The judgment is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT



|                                                                     |  |                                 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------
|Name and State or other Jurisdiction of Incorporation                |  | RegistrantsPercentage Ownership
|U. S. Subsidiaries                                                   |  |                                 
|                                                                     | 
|C/P Products Corp, an Indiana corporation                            |  | 100%                            
|United Sales and Warehouse of Texas, Inc., a Texas corporation       |  | 100%                            
|                                                                     | 
|Foreign Subsidiaries:                                                |  |                                 
|                                                                     | 
|The Coast Distribution System (Canada) Inc., Quebec, Canada          |  | 100%                            
|Ai-wek a.k.a Eurasia Recreational Vehicle Accessories Taiwan Company |  | 100%                            

In accordance with the instructions set forth in Paragraph (b) of Item 601 of
Regulation S-K, there have been omitted one U.S. subsidiary and four foreign subsidiaries that, if considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not have constituted a significant subsidiary as of December 31, 2008.
**Exhibit32.2**

**Certification of Chief FinancialOfficer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to**

**Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created bySection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersignedofficer of Eschelon Telecom, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies, tosuch officer’s knowledge, that:

(i)            the accompanying Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31,2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended; and

(ii)           the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.
| Sign:                   | /S/    Geoffrey M. Boyd |   |
|-------------------------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
| Geoffrey M. Boyd        |
| Chief Financial Officer |
| May 9, 2007             |

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of this Report or asa separate disclosure document.  A signedoriginal of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided tothe Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
#### Eugene HARRISON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28717.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 23, 1957.

James E. Faulkner, Coldspring, for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas,- State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

The conviction is for driving while intoxicated; the punishment, thirty days in jail and a fine of $50.

The complaint alleged- that the offense was committed on 'or about the 26th day *824of August, 1956. The information based upon the complaint, alleged that the offense was committed on or about the 27th day of August, 1956.

Because of the different dates of the commission of the offense as alleged there is a fatal variance between the complaint and information. 23 Tex.Jur. 604, Sec. 13; 1 Branch’s Ann.P.C., 2nd Ed., 456, Sec. 455; Lackey v. State, 53 Tex.Cr.R. 459, 110 S.W. 903; Kelly v. State, 81 Tex.Cr. R. 408, 195 S.W. 853; Bayless v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 1, 123 S.W.2d 354; Murphy v. State, 149 Tex.Cr.R. 269, 193 S.W.2d 820; Dixon v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 626, 279 S.W.2d 868.

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

Opinion approved by the court.
Assignment of Asset Purchase Agreement



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 ASSIGNMENT OF ASSET PURCHASE AGREEMENT 
  
 This Assignment of Asset Purchase Agreement (this “Assignment”) is made as of March 15, 2004, by and between
HORIZON HEALTH CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (“Assignor”), and HHC INDIANA, INC., an Indiana corporation (“Assignee”). 
  

R E C I T A L S: 
  
 WHEREAS, Assignor is a party to that certain Asset Purchase Agreement dated as of March 12, 2004 (the “Purchase Agreement”), by and between
Assignor and Northern Indiana Hospital, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Seller”). 
  
 WHEREAS, Assignee is wholly-owned by Assignor. 
  
 WHEREAS, as permitted by Section 12.3 of the Purchase Agreement, on the terms and conditions stated herein, (a) Assignor desires to assign and transfer to
Assignee all rights and obligations of Assignor as Purchaser under the Purchase Agreement, including but not limited to the right and obligation to purchase the Assets (the “Assignor Rights”), and (b) Assignee desires to accept such
assignment and transfer of the Assignor Rights from Assignor and to assume the obligations of Assignor under the Purchase Agreement. 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms and conditions herein stated, Assignor and Assignee hereby agree as follows: 
  
 1. Definitions. Unless the terms or context of this Assignment
otherwise require or provide, each capitalized term used in this Assignment shall have the meaning given to such term in the Purchase Agreement. 
  
 2. Assignment of Rights; Assumption of Obligations. Assignor hereby transfers, assigns and delivers the Assignor Rights to Assignee. Assignee
hereby accepts the Assignor Rights and hereby assumes and agrees to perform all of the obligations of Assignor under the express terms of the Purchase Agreement. 
  
 3. Guaranty of Assignee’s Obligations. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Assignment, Assignor
acknowledges that, pursuant to the terms of the Purchase Agreement, Assignor remains liable for the obligations and liabilities of Assignor under the Purchase Agreement. 
  
 4. Binding Effect. This Assignment shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, the respective parties
hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 
  
 5.
Counterparts. This Assignment may be executed and delivered (including by facsimile transmission) by one or all of the parties in several counterparts and all such counterparts so executed shall together be deemed to constitute one final
agreement as if signed by all parties, and each such counterpart shall be deemed to be an original. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Assignment to be effective as of the date first set
forth above. 
  

			
	 ASSIGNOR:

	
	 HORIZON HEALTH CORPORATION, a
 Delaware
corporation

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Ronald C. Drabik


	 Name:
	 	 Ronald C. Drabik

	 Title:
	 	Senior Vice President – Finance and Administration
	
	 ASSIGNEE:

	
	 HHC INDIANA, INC., an Indiana corporation

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Ronald C. Drabik


	 Name:
	 	 Ronald C. Drabik

	 Title:
	 	Senior Vice President – Finance and Administration


  

 2
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



November 15, 2004



In connection with the Large Scale Biology Corporation Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kevin J. Ryan, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my 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) | that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Large Scale Biology Corporation for the
fiscal period covered by the Report.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ Kevin J. RyanKevin J. RyanPresident and Chief Executive OfficerLarge Scale Biology Corporation
EXHIBIT 23.4

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

         We  hereby  consent  to  the   incorporation   by  reference  into  the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 Nos. 033-61315 and 333-46076 of National Home
Health Care Corp. (the "Company") of our reports dated October 7, 1998 appearing
in the Company's  Annual Report on this Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July
31, 2000.

/s/ Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP
------------------------------------
Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP

New York, New York
October 24, 2000
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350) In connection with the Annual Report of McRae Industries, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for
the fiscal year ending July 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, D. Gary McRae, President and CEO of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company. /s/ D. Gary McRaeD. Gary McRaePresident and CEO
 June 24, 2005 44
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 160 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 160

  To amend title II of the Social Security Act to eliminate the five-
month waiting period in the disability insurance program, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 2011

  Mr. Shuler introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title II of the Social Security Act to eliminate the five-
month waiting period in the disability insurance program, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Social Security Fairness for the 
Terminally Ill Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF TITLE II WAITING PERIOD FOR TERMINALLY ILL 
              INDIVIDUALS.

    (a) In General.--Section 223(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 423(a)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
sentence: ``In the case of any application for disability insurance 
benefits filed by an individual who is determined to be under a 
disability and who has been certified as terminally ill by a physician 
(as defined in section 1861(r)(1)), this paragraph shall be applied 
without regard to any waiting period. For the purposes of the preceding 
sentence, an individual is considered to be terminally ill if the 
individual has a medical prognosis that the individual's life 
expectancy is 6 months or less.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall take 
effect with respect to applications filed after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.2

                                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 Bancorp Rhode Island, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (a) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (b) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated this 12th day of November, 2002.




                                       /s/ Albert R. Rietheimer
                                       ---------------------------
                                           Albert R. Rietheimer
                                           Chief Financial Officer
                                           and Treasurer


<PAGE>
#### Jane P. CASTRO, Appellant, v. AMERICAN NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 12758.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Nov. 24, 1954.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 29, 1954.

G. Woodson Morris, San Antonio, for appellant.

Maxwell Burket, San Antonio, for ap-pellee.

W. O. MURRAY, Chief Justice.

This is a suit on an insurance policy issued upon the life of Charlie Castro, the plaintiff, Jane P. Castro, being the beneficiary in the policy. The trial was to a jury and resulted in judgment in keeping with their findings, that plaintiff take nothing, and Jane P. Castro has prosecuted this appeal.

The policy of insurance contained a legal and binding stipulation to the effect that the policy must issue and be delivered during the lifetime and “good health” of Charlie Castro.

The jury was asked the following question and gave the following answer:

> “Question No. 19: Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that on March 23, 1949 (the date of the issuance of the policy), Charlie Castro was not in good health, as that term is herein below defined?”

> “We, the jury, answer: He was not in good health.”

There being no question raised, we will presume that the evidence supports the answer of the jury, and this finding precludes any recovery herein. American National Insurance Co. v. Lawson, Tex. Com.App., 133 Tex. 146, 127 S.W.2d 294.

The judgment is affirmed.
#### UNIVERSAL C. I. T. CREDIT CORPORATION et al., Appellants, v. Clark MILLS et al., d/b/a Economy Motor Company, Appellees.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 3, 1957.

Robert J. Watson, Middlesboro, Herschel M. Sutton, Corbin, for appellants.

Lester L. Parrott, Barbourville, for ap-pellees.

PER CURIAM.

This case is before us on motion for an appeal under KRS 21.080.

The case was tried before the court without submission to a jury, and the appel-lees, defendants below, obtained a judgment for $818.63 on their counterclaim.

"We have considered the contentions of counsel, and conclude that the judgment is correct.

The motion for an appeal is overruled and the judgment is affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6562

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GARY A. JOHNSON, a/k/a Chub,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District

Judge. (CR-93-63-R, CA-97-290-R)

Submitted: July 22, 1998 Decided: August 10, 1998

Before ERVIN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary A. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Johnson, Nos. CR-93-63-R ; CA-97-290-R

(W.D. Va. Feb. 17, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
September 2 0 , 2016

Exemption No. 14760 A

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 4228

Mr. Chad Brown

Twin City Aerial

2354 Fairview Lane

Mound, MN 55364

Dear Mr. Brown :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition for an amendment. It explains

the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists any changes to the original conditions

and limitations.

By letter dated February 20, 2016 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

on behalf of Twin City Aerial (hereinafter petitioner or operator) for an amendment to your

current exemption . That exemption from §§ 61.23(a) and ( c ), 61.101(e)(4 ) and (5), 61.113(a),

61.315(a) , 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 9 1.151(a)(1), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and

(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows the

petitioner to conduct UAS operations

. You requested an amendment to change the company

name from Chad Brown to Twin City Aerial

. 1

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists fo r not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested amendment to the exemption would not set a

precedent, and any delay in acting on this pe tition would be detrimental to the petitioner

.

1 The petitioner also requested to add aircraft. At this time, the FAA is unable to act on this request. When the

FAA is ready to act, we will proceed accordingly and no further action will be required by the petitioner.2

Our Decision

The FAA has d etermined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 14760

remains valid and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority contained

in 49 U.S.C

. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the operator is

granted an amendment to change the operator name

.

The operator shall add this amendment to its original exemption.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of amendment, Twin City Aerial is hereafter referred to as the operator. All

conditions and limitations within Grant of Exemption No. 14760 remain in effect

.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

T his exemption terminates on February 28, 2018 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/ s/

John S. Duncan

Di rector, Flight Standards Service