alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Allen Wooster, Respondent, v Maximilliano Soriano, Respondent, and Kengraphics Interiors, Inc., Also Known as Kenger, Inc., et al., Appellants.

Order, Appellate Term, New York County (Jawn A. Sandifer, J. P., Edith Miller, J., William P. McCooe, J., dissenting), entered March 1, 1989, affirming an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York (Alfred Toker, J.), entered March 1, 1989, which, *inter alia,*denied defendant Kengraphics Interiors, Inc.’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3212 for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that he suffered injuries after being struck by a bicycle operated by defendant Soriano. The claim against the Kengraphics defendants is that their truck obstructed plaintiff’s view as he attempted to cross the street.

Summary judgment was properly denied. In *O’Connor v Pecoraro*(141 AD2d 443, 445) it was noted that “owners of improperly parked cars may be held liable to plaintiffs injured by negligent drivers of other vehicles, depending on the determinations by the trier of fact of the issues of foreseeability and proximate cause unique to the particular case”. *(See also, Fleischer v White Rose Food Corp.,*152 AD2d 489.) These *234issues must be resolved at trial. Nor is the "serious injury” threshold pursuant to Insurance Law §5102 applicable. The loss alleged by plaintiff does not arise out of the "use or operation” of the vehicle by Kengraphics, since the unoccupied vehicle was merely parked on a public street and was not, at that time, being used or otherwise engaged in some ongoing activity. *(McConnell v Fireman’s Fund Am. Ins. Co.,*49 AD2d 676.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5409 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain wire containing 99.9 

percent or more by weight of gold and with dopants added to control 

wirebonding characteristics. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. HONDA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain wire 

containing 99.9 percent or more by weight of gold and 

with dopants added to control wirebonding characteristics. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN WIRE CONTAINING 99.9 PERCENT OR 

4 MORE BY WEIGHT OF GOLD AND WITH 

5 DOPANTS ADDED TO CONTROL 

6 WIREBONDING CHARACTERISTICS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.7108 of the Har8 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5409 IH

1 wire containing 99.9 percent or more by weight of gold 

2 and with dopants added to control wirebonding character3 istics, having a diameter of 0.05 mm or less, for use in 

4 the manufacture of diodes, transistors or similar semicon5 ductor devices or electronic integrated circuits) is amended 

6 by striking the date in the effective period column and 

7 inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

10 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

11 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7258

In Re: CECIL EDWARD JACKSON,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-97-261)

Submitted: October 26, 2005 Decided: November 21, 2005

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cecil Edward Jackson, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Cecil Edward Jackson filed a petition for writ of

mandamus alleging undue delay by the district court in ruling on

his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. The district court ruled on the

motion by order entered on September 30, 2005. Accordingly, the

mandamus petition is now moot. Therefore, although we grant

Jackson’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition

for mandamus relief. 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.

PETITION DENIED
|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History:                                                                         
|                                                                                      
|New Mexico--East Shale Proved Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                      
|                                                                                      
|New Mexico--East Shale Proved Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                      

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 680    | W      | 4,934  | 4,642 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 3,183  | 6,180  |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
EXHIBIT
32.2
 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 Annual Report of Atlas America Public #11-2002 Ltd. (the
"Partnership") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Matthew A. Jones, Chief Financial Officer of the MGP, 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 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
      Partnership.
 
 By:
              /s/ Matthew A.
      JonesName:
              Matthew
      A. JonesTitle:
              Chief
      Financial Officer of the Managing General PartnerDate:
              March
      28, 2008
**ORDER**

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19
- 0388 STATE OF MONTANA ,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. WILLIAM EUGENE JOHNSON ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** The State of Montana has asked this Court to allow Ms. Lauren Amongero to pract ice be for e this Court in this case pursuant to the Montana Student Practice Rule, subject to the restrictions of the Rule. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Laur en Amongero sh all be allowed to practice before this Court in the above

- entitled matter under and subj ect to th e restrictions of the Montana Student Practice Rule. The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to all counsel of record.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 1 2020

07/01/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0388
**EXHIBIT
      23.1**





**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statements on
      Form S-3 and S-8 of our report dated January 27, 2006 relating to the
      financial statements and the financial statement schedule which appears in
      the
      Tennessee Valley Financial Holdings, Inc. Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for
      the
      year ended December 31, 2005. We also consent to the reference to us under
      the heading "Experts" in such Registration Statement.








/s/
      Pugh
& Company, P.C.





Knoxville,
      Tennessee


March
      24,
      2006
##### 



Exhibit 31.1 Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. Section 1350) I, Floyd E. Wicks, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:  1)
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period
ended June 30, 2004 of American States Water Company and of Southern
California Water Company (both referred to as the Registrant);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 Registrants 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, including its consolidated subsidiaries, 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; andc)
    
    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.  5)
    
    The Registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee of
Registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):  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; andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrants
internal controls over financial reporting. Dated: August 9, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Floyd E. WicksFloyd E. WicksChief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Inconnection with the annual report of Data Call Technologies, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof, I, Timothy E. Vance, CEO of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, 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 the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Timothy E. Vance

Timothy E. VanceCEODated: April 13, 2011

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to Data Call Technologies, Inc. andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5262 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Bis(4-tbutylcyclohexyl) 

peroxydicarbonate. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

Mr. OLSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Bis(4- 

tbutylcyclohexyl) peroxydicarbonate. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. BIS(4-TBUTYLCYCLOHEXYL) 

4 PEROXYDICARBONATE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.40.59 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

7 Bis(4-tbutylcyclohexyl) peroxydicarbonate) is amended by 

8 striking the date in the effective period column and insert9 ing ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5262 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Case 5:20-cv-00291 Document 1-1 Filed 03/10/20 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5293 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5293

                To suspend temporarily the duty on HPHP.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                To suspend temporarily the duty on HPHP.

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

SECTION 1. HPHP.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Nonaromatic         Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          carboxylic acids                                                  12/31/2015
                          with alcohol
                          function, without
                          other oxygen
                          function, and
                          their
                          derivatives,
                          Hydroxypivalyl
                          hydroxypivalate,
                          (CAS No. 1115-20-
                          4) (provided for
                          in subheading
                          2918.19.90)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 02-4309

PATRICK STEVENS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville.

Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge.

(CR-98-462)

Submitted: September 27, 2002

Decided: November 5, 2002

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

Parks N. Small, Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina,

for Appellant. Isaac Louis Johnson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED

STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Patrick Stevens appeals his conviction of one count of possession

with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§ 841(a) (2000) and sentence to 140 months in prison and three years

of supervised release. We affirm. 

Stevens’ counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). In the Anders brief, Stevens’ counsel

briefed two issues, both of which counsel ultimately concluded were

not meritorious: whether the district court fully complied with the

requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, and whether the district court

erred in applying the sentencing guidelines. Stevens was informed of

his right to file a pro se supplemental brief but failed to do so. 

We review violations of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 for plain error. See

United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517, 524-27 (4th Cir. 2002).

Under this standard, we exercise our discretion only to correct errors

that are plain, material, or affecting substantial rights, and which seriously affect the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id. at 524 (citing United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 731-

32 (1993)). We have reviewed the record and find no error. 

We review the district court’s application of the sentencing guidelines for clear error as to factual findings; we review legal determinations de novo. United States v. Blake, 81 F.3d 498, 503 (4th Cir.

1996). We have reviewed the district court’s application of the guidelines and find no error. 

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record and

have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Stevens’ conviction and sentence. We require that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the

United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition

be filed, but counsel believes that such petition would be frivolous,

then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served

2 UNITED STATES v. STEVENS
on the client. 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

UNITED STATES v. STEVENS 3
----

Authorisation of State aid pursuant to Article 61 of the EEA Agreement and Article 1(3) in Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement

EFTA Surveillance Authority decision not to raise objections

(2006/C 140/05)

Date of adoption: 

EFTA State: Norway

Aid No: 59033

Title: National direct transport aid scheme

Objective: The objective of the scheme is to offset competitive disadvantages resulting from extra transport costs for firms located in peripheral areas and within sparsely populated regions and thus situated long distances away from their markets

Legal basis: Regulation No 565 of 09.05.2003 on investment grants and delimitation of the geographical area for development funds (Forskrift om investeringstilskot og avgrensing av det geografiske verkeområdet for dei regional- og distriktspolitiske verkemidla), Regulation No 1461 of 24.06.2004 on national transport aid (Forskrift om nasjonal transportstøtte), Proposition to the Storting No 1 (2004-2005) from the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (the State budget), and National guidelines for transport aid (Nasjonale retningslinjer for transportstøtte)

Budget/Duration: The budget of the scheme is NOK 375 million (approximately EUR 47 million) per year. The duration of the scheme is until 31 December 2006. The authorized amendments will be valuable for 2005 and 2006

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://www.eftasurv.int/fieldsofwork/fieldstateaid/stateaidregister

----
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 7836

BRENDAN PEMBERTON EL , Plaintiff

- Appellant , and TITUS LAMONT BATS, a/k/a Titus Batts

- Bey; ALONZO DURHAM

- BEY, JR. , Plaintiffs ,

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Defendant

- Appellee

.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 5:19

- ct

- 03068

- FL )

Submitted : March 10, 2020 Decided: March 13, 2020

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Brendan Pemberton El, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Brendan Pemberton El appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action without prejudice for failure to prosecute

. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Pemberton El v. United States , No. 5:19

- ct

- 03068

- FL (E.D.N.C. Nov. 29, 2019). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.
AFFIRMED