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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6321

DONALD STANTON SHEALY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BONITA MOSELEY,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. 

David C. Norton, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00257-DCN)

Submitted: August 16, 2018 Decided: August 21, 2018

Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donald Stanton Shealy, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Donald Stanton Shealy, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 

U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. Shealy v. Moseley, No. 1:18-cv-00257-DCN (Mar. 

20, 2018). 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
**Consent      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

|   | (1) | Registration                Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-127966), pertaining to the 2002 Stock                Plan,                2005 Equity Incentive Plan, and 2005 Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option                Plan of Hoku Scientific, Inc.; |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | Registration                Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-150855), pertaining to a $110 million                offering                of common stock, preferred stock, warrants, senior debt securities                and                subordinated debt securities of Hoku Scientific,                Inc; |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (3) | Registration                Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-149599), pertaining to an offering of                2,893,519 shares of common stock of Hoku Scientific, Inc.;                and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (4) | Registration                Statement (Form S-8 333-144465), pertaining to the 2005 Equity Incentive                Plan and the 2005 Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan of Hoku                Scientific, Inc. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/                  Ernst & Young LLP |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, 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.

October 21, 2014

Order 

October 21, 2014

150118(53)

WINDRUSH, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

LEE VANPOPERING, SHAGBARK

DEVELOPMENT, INC., and NORTHLAND

MANAGEMENT, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees.

SC: 150118

COA: 315958

Kent CC: 09-008274-CK

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the defendants-appellees to extend the 

time for filing their responsive brief in this application for leave to appeal is GRANTED. 

The brief will be accepted as timely filed if filed on or before October 31, 2014.
#### Ernest Liebow et al., Appellants, v Town of Hempstead, Respondent.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Collins, J.), dated June 19, 1989, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

This action to recover damages resulting from the plaintiff Ernest Liebow’s fall on a golf course owned and operated by the defendant Town of Hempstead was dismissed as barred by the Town of Hempstead Code § 6-2, which requires, *inter alia,*prior written notification of any defective condition on "park property”. Town of Hempstead Code § 78-1 provides that the term "park” includes golf courses. Therefore, since a golf course comes within the purview of Town of Hempstead Code § 6-2, it was incumbent upon the plaintiffs to plead and prove that prior written notice had been given to the town *(see, Goldston v Town of Babylon,*145 AD2d 534). No such written notice was given and there is insufficient evidence of affirmative acts of negligence so as to create a triable issue of fact. Thus, the complaint was properly dismissed *(see, Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557, 562; *Abbatecola v Town of Islip,*97 AD2d 780). Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Kooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 203 (Thursday, October 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 62740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26872]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of 
the Sleep Disorders Research Advisory Board.
    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to 
space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special 
assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable 
accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in 
advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: Sleep Disorders Research Advisory Board.
    Date: December 6, 2000.
    Time: 8:30 am to 3:00 pm.
    Agenda: To discuss sleep research and education priorities and 
programs.
    Place: Natcher Building 45, Conference Room D, National 
Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Michael J Twery, PhD, Acting Director, National 
Center on Sleep Disorders Research, NIH/National Heart, Lung, and 
Blood Institute, National Center on Sleep Disorders Research, Two 
Rockledge Center, Suite 10038, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 
20892, 301/435-0199.


(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 12, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-26872 Filed 10-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
exhibit 32







FORM OF SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS



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 Premier Document Services, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Crystal Kim Han, President/CEO and Treasurer/CFO, of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.











/s/ Crystal Kim Han

Crystal Kim Han

President/CEO and Treasurer/CFO

March 25, 2005





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

1
June 9, 2014

M r. Anthony Costa

Sr. Quality Manager

Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation

P.O. Box 2206

Savannah, GA 31402

- 2206

De ar Costa :

We have received your May 28

, 2014 correspondence submitted to the Federal Docket

withdrawing your January 14

, 2014 petition on b ehalf of Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation

for an exemption from § 145.107 ( a ) (1) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulat ions.

Your letter has been placed in the p ublic docket No. FAA

- 2014

- 0028 . No further action will

be taken on your petition.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda D. Courtney

Manager, Aircraft and Airport Rules Division
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, October 18, 2018. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, October 18, 2018 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A19D0113. DULUTH GEORGIA 3312 BERKELEY LAKE PROPERTIES, LLC, et al. v. U.S. LUMBER GROUP, LLC .
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 17A07420
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 31.1
                                  CERTIFICATION

      I, Harold F. Zagunis, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of Sequoia
Residential Funding, Inc., a Delaware corporation, hereby certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on
Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of the
Certificates for periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of
Sequoia Residential Funding, Inc.;

      2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
whole, 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 as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and
servicing agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these
reports;

      4. Based on my knowledge and upon the annual compliance statement included
in the report and required to be delivered to the trustee in accordance with the
terms of the pooling and servicing agreement, and except as disclosed in the
reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing
agreement; and

      5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report
provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in
compliance with the Uniform Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar
procedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing agreement, that is included
in these reports.

      In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Morgan Stanley
Dean Witter Credit Corporation, as Servicer, GreenPoint Mortgage Funding, Inc.,
as Servicer, Cendant Mortgage Corporation, as Servicer and Bank of America,
N.A., as Servicer.

Date: March 31, 2005

/s/ Harold F. Zagunis
-------------------------------
Signature
Name: Harold F. Zagunis
Title: Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
1

Filed 5/3/23 P. v. Johnson CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

JASON WIBERT JOHNSON,

Defendant and Appellant. C097040

(Super. Ct. No. 04F03055)

Defendant Jason Wibert Johnson appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for

resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6. 1 Counsel filed a brief raising no arguable

issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 ( Delgadillo ) and requesting we

exercise our discretion to review the entire record for arguable issues on appeal.

1 Effective June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered former section 1170.95 to section

1172.6. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) There were no substantive changes to the statute.

Defendant filed his petition under former section 1170.95, but we will cite to the current

section 1172.6 throughout this opinion.2

On January 18, 2023, we notified defendant: 1) counsel had filed a brief

indicating no arguable issues had been identified by counsel; 2) as a case arising from an

order denying postconviction r elief, defendant was not entitled to counsel or to an

independent review of the record ; and 3) in accordance with the procedures set forth in

Delgadillo , defendant had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief or letter raising

any argument he wanted t his court to consider. In addition, we notified defendant if we

did not receive a letter or brief within that 30

- day period, the court may dismiss the

appeal as abandoned. More than 30 days have elapsed and we have received no

communication from defendan t.

We consider defendant’s appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed.

( Delgadillo, supra

, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)



### D ISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed

.

HULL, J.

We concur:

ROBIE, Acting P. J.

EARL, J.
Exhibit 13.2




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 on Form 20-F of Lingo Media Corporation (the “Registrant”) for the year ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby 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 annual report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 2.
The information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
 
 Date: January 22, 2013
 /s/ Khurram QureshiKhurram Qureshi

Chief Financial Officer
 
 This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
##### 



Exhibit 23 Consent of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm The Manager and Member
DaimlerChrysler Services North America LLC: We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-120110) on Form
S-3 of DaimlerChrysler Master Owner Trust of our report dated March 24, 2005, with respect to the
statements of assets, liabilities and equity arising from cash transactions of DaimlerChrysler
Master Owner Trust (the Trust) as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related statements of
cash receipts and disbursements for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the period June
1, 2002 (inception) through December 31, 2002, which report appears in the December 31, 2004,
annual report on Form 10-K of the Trust. Our report dated March 24, 2005 contains an explanatory paragraph stating that the financial
statements were prepared on the basis of cash receipts and disbursements, which is a comprehensive
basis of accounting other than accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America. Detroit, Michigan
March 24, 2005
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T M I RNA I RE NE VA ZQUEZ VI TAL, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 72189 A ge nc yN o. A 075- 763- 039 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r13, 2010 ** B e f o r e : S I L V E R M A N , C A L L A H A N , an dN .R . S M I T H , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . M i rnaI r e ne V a z que z V i t a l , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng her app ea l f r om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s ( “ I J ” ) de c i s i on de ny i ng he rappl i c a t i on f or 

# FI LED SEP 22 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 72189 2 c a n c e lla tio n o f

r e m o v a l. O u rju r is d ic tio n is g o v e rn e db y8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e d i s m i s s i n p arta n dd e n yi n p artth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. W e l ac k j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew the agency’ s di sc re t i on ary det erm i nat i on that V az qez V i t alfa i l ed t o sho w exce pt i on aland extre m el y unu sualhardshi p t o h er q u al i fyi n g rel at i v es. See M art i nez-R osas v. G on zales , 4 2 4 F .3 d9 2 6 , 9 2 9 - 3 0 ( 9 th C i r. 20 05 ). V a z que z V i t a l ’ s c ont e nt i on tha tthe I J ’ s a l l e ge d bi a s de pr i ve d he rof due p r o c e s s is n o t s up p o rte db yth e r e c o r d , an dh e rr e m a in in g du e p r o c e s s c h a lle n g e is un pers uasi ve. W e r e je c t V a z q u e z V ita l’s c o n te n tio n th a t th e B I A is s u e dab o ile rp la te de c i s i on w i thoutr e vi e w i ng the r e c or d, be c aus e s he ha s notove r c om e the p r e s u m p tio n th a t th e B I A d idr e v ie w th e r e c o r d . Se e La r i ta -M a r t i n ezv . I

NS , 220 F . 3d 10 92 , 10 95 -96 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D IS M IS S E D i n p art; D E N IE D i n p art .
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 30, 2016

p1121 

# Order

Clerk November 30, 2016

152855(19)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 152855

COA: 327980

Wayne CC: 98

- 004724

- FC

THEODORE WILLIAMS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s September 6,

2016 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it d oes not appear that the order was

entered erroneously.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 1867

KAROLINA SORENSSON , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. DITECH FINANCIAL LLC/ GREENTREE , Defendant

- Appellee

.

No. 18
- 1871

KAROLINA SORENSSON , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC, formerly d/b/a Green Tree Servicing, LLC , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Greenville

. James C. Dever III , District Judge. ( 4:17

- cv
- 00067

- D; 4:18

- cv
- 00042

- D )

Submitted : December 18, 2018 Decided: December 20, 20182 Before AGEE, THACKER, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Karolina Sorensson, Appellant Pro Se. Marc James Ayers, Birmingham, Alabama , Jonathan Edward Schulz, BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Ap pellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: Karolina Sorensson appeals from the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaints challenging foreclosure proceedings under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Sorensson v. Di t ech Fin. LLC , Nos. 4:17

- cv
- 00067

- D;
4:18

- cv
- 00042

- D (E.D.N.C., July 17, 2 018)

. We deny Sorensson’s motion for a restraining order. 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
July 16 , 2015



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

EX PARTE VIDAL ALEXA NDER REYES

NO. 14

- 14

- 00440

- CR

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of t he record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.