alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I N THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JENNIFER NIX

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 17

- 2995

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE

ASSOCIATION and CHRISTOPHER NIX

,

Appellee s

.

_____ ___________________________/

Opinion filed October 5, 2018

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Hernando County

, Daniel B. Merritt, Sr. , Judge.

Richard J. Mockler, of Stay In My Home, P.A., St. Petersburg, for Appellant.

Michael W. Smith a nd Shaib Y.

Rios , of Brock & Scott, PLLC, Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellee , Federal National Mortgage Association

.

No Appearance for other Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Jennifer Nix appeals from the final judgment of foreclosure entered after trial

,

arguing that the evidence presented was insufficient to prove the mailing of the default

letter as required under Paragraph 22 of the mortgage. Federal National Mortgage

Association concedes error. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for entry of an order2 of involuntary dismissal. E .g.

, Madl v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. , 244 So. 3d 1134, 1137

(Fla. 5th DCA 2017).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

COHEN, C.J., ORFI NGER and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 99.1 - ANNUAL FUNDS APPLICATION STATEMENT




                              [LOGO] JPMORGAN


June 30, 2005

    Hartford Life Global Funding Trusts - Annual Funds Application Statement

I, Albert P. Mari, Jr., being a duly appointed officer of JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A. ("Indenture Trustee"), do hereby certify on behalf of the Indenture
Trustee, that, with respect to Hartford Life Global Funding Trust 2005-022:





         1. I have reviewed and examined the application by the Indenture
Trustee, during the fiscal year ending June 15, 2005; of trust money collected
by the Indenture Trustee pursuant to Section 5.02 of the Indenture, pursuant to
which the trust's notes (the "Notes") were issued; and

         2. Based upon my review and examination, to the best of my knowledge,
during such fiscal year, the trust money collected by the Indenture Trustee was
properly applied, pursuant to Section 5.02 of the Indenture.

         Nothing herein shall constitute a representation as to the proper
application by the registered holder of the Notes or the trust of the trust
monies received by it.



JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., as Indenture Trustee
Worldwide Securities Services
4 New York Plaza, 15th Floor
New York, NY 10004


/s/ Albert P. Mari, Jr.


Name:  Albert P. Mari, Jr.
Title: Vice President


<TABLE>
<S><C>
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK o Institutional Trust Services o 4 New York Plaza, Floor 15, New York, NY 10004
</TABLE>
**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 this Amended Annual Report of Dream Media, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-KSB for the twelve months ending January 31, 2007 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Ken Osako, President,
      Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that:





(1)  This
      Amended 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 this Amended Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition of the Company as of the dates
      presented and the results of operations of the Company.








/ s/
      Ken
      Osako


Ken
      Osako


Chief
      Executive
      Officer


Chief
      Financial
      Officer





Dated:
      May 16, 2007
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 on Form 10-Q of Network Engines, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, John H. Curtis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | (1) |  | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: August 14, 2003



LOGOJohn H. CurtisChief Executive Officer
#### ELDRIDGE v. STATE.

No. 26521.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 21, 1953.

*580Martin & Martin, Wichita Falls, for appellant.

George W. Anderson, Jr., Dist. Atty., Wichita Falls, Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is robbery; the punishment, five years.

Shortly after appellant’s arrest, he made application for a writ of habeas corpus. At this hearing the injured party testified that he was the robber. No other witness testified at such hearing, though there were others present when the crime was committed.

When the case was called for trial, appellant waived a jury, plead guilty, and, with the consent of the accused and his attorney, the District Attorney dictated into the record an agreement that if the prosecuting witness were present that she would identify the appellant as the robber.

Thereafter, appellant filed a motion for new trial, alleging that he was not guilty and that his plea of guilty had been secured by means of persuasion by the District Attorney contrary to the terms of Article 501, C.C.P.

'At the hearing on the motion, the injured party testified, “I can’t say positively he is the one.” The other witnesses who were present when the crime was committed testified that the appellant was not the robber.

At the time of the entry of the plea of guilty the appellant was under a suspended sentence for another offense.

The District Attorney, testifying on the motion for new trial relating to his conversation with the accused prior to the plea of guilty, said:

“A. * * * And I told him that I would recommend to the Court that he receive the minimum sentence of five years and that I would — I don’t remember if I told him definitely that I would not try to get the suspended sentence revoked, but I— I gave him that impression, I’m sure.

******

“Q. You told him that you wouldn’t revoke his suspended sentence, isn’t that right? A. Yes, sir.”

Article 779, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., reads in part, as follows:

“Upon the final conviction of the defendant of any other felony, pending the suspension of sentence, the court granting such suspension *shall*cause a capias to issue for the arrest of the defendant if he is not then in the custody of such court, and during a term of the court, *shall*pronounce sentence upon the original judgment of conviction, and *shall*cumulate the punishment of the first with the punishment of any subsequent conviction or convictions * * (Italics ours.)

It thus appears that the District Attorney made a promise to the accused which lead him to believe that he would receive an overall punishment less than the minimum fixed by law.

We have concluded that the learned trial judge fell into error when he refused to grant appellant’s motion for new trial.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ERIC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. JAM ES PHINAZEE ELLIOTT, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 14-30107

D.C . No. 3:11-c r-00060-HA M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ore gon A nc e r L. Ha gge rty , Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Oc tobe r 14, 2015 * * B e fore : SILVERM AN, B YB EE, a nd WATFORD, C irc uit Judge s. Jam e s Phinaz e e Elliott a

ppe a l s from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd c ha lle nge s his jury -tria l c onvic t ion a nd 37-m onth se nte nc e for c o nspira c y to distributeoxy c o done an d to usec om m unic ation fa c ilitie s, in viola tion of 21 U.S.C . §§ 841(a )(1), (b)(1)(C ), 843(b), a nd 846. Pursua

nt to Ande rs v . C

alifornia , 386 

# FIL ED OCT 19 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).U.S. 738 (1967), Elliott’ s c o unse l ha s file d a brie f stating tha

t the re are no grounds for re lie f, a long with a m otion to withdra w a s c ounse l of re c ord. Elliott ha s file d a pro se supple m e nt a l brie f. No a nswe ring brie f ha s be e n file d . Our inde pe nde nt re v i e w of the re c ord pursua nt to Pe nson v . Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), disc lose s no a rgua ble grounds for re lie f on dire c t a ppe a l. W e de c line to a ddre ss on dire c t a ppe a l Elliott’ s a

rgum e nt tha

t tria l a nd se nte nc ing c ounse l provide d ine ffe c t ive a ssista

nc e . Se eUnite d State

s v . Rahman , 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th C ir. 2011). C ounse l’ s m otion to withdra w is G RANT E D. AFFIRM E D.

1 4 - 3 0 1 0 7 2
Exhibit 32

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



<PAGE>


Exhibit 32

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

     I,  Kexi Xu,  President  and CFO of Jointland Development,  Inc.  (the
"Company"), certify that:

1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10QSB of the Company for the period ended
September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

         Dated:  November 22, 2005      Officer:   Kexi Xu

                                        Name:       /s/ Kexi Xu
                                                    ----------------------------
                                        Position:  President, CEO, CFO
```

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 Form 10-QSB Quarterly Report of Huayang International
Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

November 19, 2002,
By: /s/ Wang Yufei
Wang Yufei, Chief Financial Officer
```
Exhibit 4.354

 

/Emblem of the Russian Federation/

 

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND MASS MEDIA

 

LICENSE

 

No. 168615 dated December 30, 2018

 

For Rendering

 

radio telephone services

 

This License is granted to

 

Open Joint Stock Company

 

Mobile TeleSystems

 

Primary State Registration Number of a Legal Entity 
 (Individual Entrepreneur) (OGRN, OGRNIP)

 

1027700149124

 

Tax Identification Number (TIN)

 

7740000076

 











 

Location address (place of residence):

 

4, Marksistskaya Str., Moscow, 109147

 

The territory covered by telecommunications services is specified in the Appendix.

 

This License is granted for a term:

 

until December 30, 2023.

 

This License is granted by decision of the licensing body - Order dated September 14, 2018 No. 660-рчс

 

Appendix being an integral part of this license is executed on 3 sheets.

 

	
Deputy Head
    	
/signature/ A.A.   Pankov
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Stamp here

Official seal:
    MINISTRY OF TELECOM AND   MASS
   COMMUNICATIONS
   OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
   FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION
   IN THE SPHERE
   OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION
   TECHNOLOGY
   AND MASS MEDIA
   PSRN 1087746736296
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D 20 22

- 3171

_____________________________
A. L. G.

, A child

Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA ,
Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. Susan ne Wilson Bullard , Judge

.

February 12, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.

A FFIRMED

.

B ILBREY , W INOKUR , and T ANENBAUM , JJ., concur.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, Emmalyn Dalton

, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Heather Flanagan Ross

, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
August 3, 2015

Mr. Will Anderson

RX AG Services, LLC

16470 445th Avenue

Florence, SD 57235

Dear Mr. Anderson:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 15, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-1698), but 

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply

with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, 

you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
#### SOWELL v. STATE.

No. 26820.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 3, 1954.

*108No attorney on appeal for- appellant.

■Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Presiding-Judge.

The conviction is' for the offense of unlawfully operating á motor vehicle upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor; the punishment assessed is a fine of $150. .

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. In the absence thereof nothing is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.
#### HOGAN v. STATE.

No. 26657.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 27, 1954.

*114Chappell & Chappell, Merrick & Kennedy, by Jack G. Kennedy, Lubbock, for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

At a former day of this term, we erroneously dismissed the appeal in this case. That error is now corrected by reinstating the appeal and giving consideration to the case upon its merits. The opinion dismissing the appeal is withdrawn.

This is a conviction for possessing whisky, wine, and beer for the purpose of sale in a dry area; the punishment, a fine of $500 and sixty days in jail.

•About two o’clock on the afternoon of March 4, 1953, agents of the Liquor Control Board observed an automobile being driven to and stopped in front of a Cafe.' Appellant went to the automobile and engaged in a conversation with the occupant thereof. Appellant was then seen to go into a nearby house. When he came out of the house he . was. carrying a case of be.er.

The agents stopped appellant and asked him for permission to search the house.' Appellant took from his pocket a key with which he unlocked the door. He then said to the officers, “Just go right ,in and look.”

Two hundred eighty-four half-pints of whisky, eight cases of beer, and a quantity of wine were found in the house.

Testifying as a witness in his own behalf, appellant denied the possession of the house or of the intoxicants found therein. He also denied having given *his*consent to the search of the house or of having voluntarily opened the house. He claimed that the case of beer which he had when apprehended was given to him by another person and that it did not come out of the house in which the other intoxicants were found.

There is no testimony in the record that any person other than the appellant had or was exercising any control or possession over the house at the time, or was in position to do so. Nor does the evidence suggest that the key to the house which appellant produced was capable of being used to unlock any other door.

In submitting the case to the jury, the trial court made-'appellant’s' guilt to depend upon the possession by him of the whisky, beer, and wine found in the house, because the jury were instructed to acquit the appellant if they entertained a reasonable doubt as to his possession thereof.

The state’s testimony showing that appellant was in possession of more than a quart of whisky rendered unnecessary a charge on circumstantial evidence, and appellant’s request for such a charge was properly overruled. Gonzales v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 246 S.W.2d 199; Goodman v. State, 155 Tex.Cr.R. 248, 233 S.W.2d S4S; McSwain v. State, 155 Tex.Cr.R. 38, 230 S.W.2d 227.

The trial court was authorized to accept the testimony of the state’s witnesses showing appellant’s consent to the search of the house. The objection to proof of the result of the search as being unwarranted was untenable.

No error appearing, the judgment is af■firmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
| 1.     | Such      Yearly Report of Form 10-KSB for the year ending January 31, 2008, 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 such Yearly Report on Form 10-KSB for the year      ended January 31, 2008, fairly represents in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of 51147,    Inc. |

|                | 51147,      INC. |                                                  |
|---------------------|------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                |             |                                                  |   |
| April      30, 2008 | By:              | /s/ Michael      A. Zahorik                      |   |
|                |             | Michael      A. Zahorik                               |   |
|                |             | Chief      Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                |             |                                                  |   |
Exhibit 99.3


NATIONAL CITY                      National City Mortgage Co.
LOGO OMITTED                       A Subsidiary of National City Bank of Indiana
                                   3232 Newmark Drive, Miamisburg, Ohio 45342
                                   Telephone: (937) 910-1200

                                   Mailing Address:
                                   P.O. Box 1820
                                   Dayton, Ohio 45401-1820


                     OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE




RE: BVMBS 2005-1

I, Steve Scheid, hereby certify to Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, that I
am a duly elected Senior Vice President of National City Mortgage Corporation
(the "Company"), a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Ohio and
further as follows:

          (i)       A review of the activities of the Servicer during the
                    preceding calendar year and of performance under this
                    Agreement has been made under such officers' supervision,

          (ii)      The Servicer has fully complied with the provisions of this
                    Agreement and

          (iii)     To the best of such officers' knowledge, based on such
                    review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations
                    under this Agreement throughout such year, or, if there has
                    been a default in the fulfillment of any such obligation,
                    specifying each such default known to such officer and the
                    nature and status thereof.



National City Mortgage

                /s/ Steve Scheid
Certified by:                                           Date: March 21, 2006
                ---------------------                         --------------

Name:           Steve Scheid
                ---------------------

Title:          Senior Vice President
                ---------------------