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

Exhibit 13.1

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 
    CEO Certification In connection with the annual report of Getty Copper Inc. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Corby G. Anderson, President & Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. /s/ Corby G. Anderson Name: Corby G. Anderson
    Title: President & Chief Executive Officer 
    February 17, 2011 A signed original 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. This certification accompanies the Form 20-F to which it relates, is not to be deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 20-F), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.


---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert BAZAN-MOLINA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 76-2348

Summary Calendar.*

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 16, 1976.

Amador Garcia, Corpus Christi, Tex. (Court-appointed), for defendant-appellant.

Edward B. McDonough, Jr., U. S. Atty., Mary L. Sinderson, George A. Kelt, Jr., Robert A. Berg, James R. Gough, Anna E. Stool, Asst. U. S. Attys., Houston, Tex., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, and GEWIN and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 Rule 18, 5 Cir., see *Isbell Enterprises,*Inc. *v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al.,*5 Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.

*194PER CURIAM:

Robert Bazan-Molina has appealed from his conviction in the Southern District of Texas for possession of *ISO*pounds of marijuana with intent to distribute. Finding his only contention to be without merit, we affirm.

While driving on United States Highway 281, the appellant was stopped at a permanent border patrol checkpoint located seven miles south of Falfurrias, Texas. The appellant’s vehicle had all of the windows rolled up. When the appellant opened his door to respond to the border patrolman’s questions concerning his citizenship status, the officer detected the odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle. With suspicions aroused, the officer peered through the windows of the vehicle and noticed seeds and leaves resembling marijuana on the floor below the backseat of the car. A subsequent search yielded 130 pounds of marijuana in brick form.

Appellant contends that the stopping of his vehicle and the ensuing search violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment. This conclusion is unwarranted under the decisions of this court. We have consistently held that the border patrol checkpoint near Falfurrias, Texas is a permanent checkpoint. Stopping vehicles at such checkpoints to inquire into citizenship does not violate the Fourth Amendment. *United States v. Martinez-Fuerte,*— U.S. —, 96 S.Ct. 3074, 49 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1976). Searching a vehicle at a permanent checkpoint is valid if, after stopping the vehicle, the border patrolman has probable cause to make the search. *United States v. Ortiz,*422 U.S. 891, 95 S.Ct. 2585, 45 L.Ed.2d 623 (1975). The officer’s detection of the odor of marijuana coupled with his observation of marijuana debris in the backseat area furnished probable cause for the search. *United States v. Torres,*537 F.2d 1299, 1300 (5th Cir. 1976).

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
J ONATHAN B. H ILL

M EMBER

D 202/776

- 2725 E JHILL @ DOWLOHNES

. COM

DF 202/776

- 4725



### July 16, 2012

Ms. Esta Rosenberg

Chief, U.S. Carrier Licensing Division

Office of International Aviation

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Application of JetBlue Airways Corporation for Statement of Authorization

DOT Docket OST

- 2012

- 0115

Dear Ms. Roesnberg:

JetBlue Airways has completed its polling of all carriers served with its Application for a n

Exemption for approval of its service to the Cayman Islands filed on March 19, 2012 in Docket OST

2012

- 0115. N o carrier advised us of any objection to the grant of the application. Jet B lue therefore

asks for action on its application as soon as may be pr actical.

Sincerely yours,

Jonathan B. Hill

Counsel for

Jet B lue Airways Corporation

cc: Service list in Docket OST

- 2012

- 0115

Adam Schless
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 28, 2011

y1219 

# Order

December 28, 2011

143659

CHRIS C. LAMBERT, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143659 COA: 297088 Livingston CC: 09-024549-NI GREEN OAK TOWN SHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT and MICHAEL JAIN, Defendants,

and

THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF GREEN OAK,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the May 12, 2011 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3171 

To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to approve waivers 

under the Medicaid Program under title XIX of the Social Security 

Act that are related to State provider taxes that exempt certain retirement communities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2013 

Mr. WOMACK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services 

to approve waivers under the Medicaid Program under 

title XIX of the Social Security Act that are related 

to State provider taxes that exempt certain retirement 

communities. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Provider Tax Adminis5 trative Simplification Act of 2013’’. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3171 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROVIDER TAX RULE EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN 

2 CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMU3 NITIES. 

4 In the case of a State that has a provider tax that 

5 does not apply to continuing care retirement communities 

6 or life care communities (as such terms are used for pur7 poses of section 1917(g) of the Social Security Act (42 

8 U.S.C. 1396p(g)) that have no beds that are certified to 

9 provide medical assistance (as such term is defined under 

10 section 1905(a) of such Act) under title XIX of the Social 

11 Security Act or that do not provide services for which pay12 ment may be made under title XIX of the Social Security 

13 Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 

14 approve a waiver under section 433.68(e)(2)(iii) of title 

15 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations regardless of 

16 whether the Secretary determines that the State satisfies 

17 the requirements of section 433.68(e)(2)(iii)(B) of such 

18 title. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
- 1

- Alexander Van der Bellen

Managing Director and

Associate General Counsel

Delta Air Lines, Inc.

1212 New York Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20005

202.842.4184

s ascha.vanderbellen@ delta .com

June 6 , 201 3

via email and regulations.gov

Esta Rosenberg

Chief, U.S. Air Carrier Licensing Division

Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Joint Application of Delta Air Lines, Inc. and Skywest Airlines, Inc.

F or Los Angeles

- Leon/Guanajuato Service

Docket DOT

- OST

- 2013

- 0114

Dear Ms. Rosenberg :

This letter is to confirm that Delta has polled all of the carrier s on the service list to the above

referenced application and t here are no objec tions. In these circ umstances, we urge that the

application be granted as soon as possible.

Respectfully submitted,

Alexander Van der Bellen

cc: Brian Hedberg, DOT

Bob Finamore , DOT

Brett Kruger, DOT

info@airlineinfo.com
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

 

I, Ernest J.Mrozek, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form10-K/A of The ServiceMaster Company; and

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report doesnot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report.

 

Date: March 30, 2007

 
|        |   | /s/ Ernest J. Mrozek                      |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Ernest J. Mrozek                          |
|   |   | Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

----
<PAGE>   1

                  EXHIBIT 21.1 - SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                       Other Names Under Which
              Subsidiary                     Jurisdiction of Incorporation          Such Subsidiary Does Business
              ----------                     -----------------------------          -----------------------------

<S>                                          <C>                                    <C>
GCW Holdings, Inc.                                      Delaware                                None

Costura Dominicana, Inc.                                Delaware                                None

GCI IP Sub, Inc.                                        Delaware                                None

Auburn Hosiery Mills, Inc                               Kentucky                                None

GCI Spainco, S.L.                                        Spain                                  None

Sport Socks Co. (Ireland) Ltd.                          Ireland                                 None

Sport Socks Co. (UK) Limited                         United Kingdom                             None

Gerber Childrenswear Canada, Inc.                       Delaware                                None

Costura Matamoros S.A. de C.V.                           Mexico                                 None

GCW Mexico S.A. de C.V.                                  Mexico                                 None
</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: MELISSA WARRICK , IN HER

OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS AN

ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY

FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

Relator. '

'

'

'

'

' No. 08

- 1 3

- 00 25 5

- CR

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

O R D E R

Pending before the Court is Relator’s motion to carry over the reporter’s record from cause

number 08

- 13

- 00186

- CR into the above styled and numbered mandamus proceeding. The

motion is GRANTED. The reporter’s record and supplemental reporter ’ s record filed in cause

number 08

- 13

- 00186

- CR sh all be considered filed as a reporter’s record and supplemental

reporter ’ s record in cause number 08

- 13

- 00255

- CR.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 2 9 th day of August, 2013.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera

, and Rodriguez, JJ.

(Rivera, J., not participating)
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

    REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED ACCOUNTING FIRM ON FINANCIAL STATEMENT
                                    SCHEDULE

The Board of Directors
Extendicare Health Services, Inc.:

Under date of February 22, 2006, we reported on the consolidated balance sheets
of Extendicare Health Services, Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of
December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of income,
shareholder's equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, which are included in
the Company's 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K. In connection with our audits of
the aforementioned consolidated financial statements, we also audited the
related financial statement schedule as listed in Item 15. The financial
statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company's management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statement schedule
based on our audits.

In our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation
to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents
fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.

[KPMG LLP LOGO]

Milwaukee, Wisconsin
February 22, 2006

                                   SCHEDULE II

               EXTENDICARE HEALTH SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
                            (In thousands of dollars)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        ADDITIONS:                       SUBTRACTIONS:
                                                        PROVISIONS       ADDITIONS:        ACCOUNTS
                                         BALANCE AT     FOR LOSSES        RELATING        WRITTEN OFF       BALANCE
                                          BEGINNING     ON ACCOUNTS          TO             NET OF          AT END
                 YEAR ENDED               OF PERIOD     RECEIVABLE      ACQUISITION       RECOVERIES       OF PERIOD
------------------------------------     ----------     -----------     -----------      -------------     ---------
<S>                                      <C>            <C>             <C>              <C>               <C>
   December 31, 2003................        9,309         11,038              -              8,655            11,692
   December 31, 2004................       11,692         11,325              -             12,423            10,594
   December 31, 2005................       10,594         14,421            706             11,908            13,813
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 208 (Thursday, October 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64263-64264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27544]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Mathematical Sciences; Notice of 
Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. Law 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Special Emphasis in Mathematical Sciences (1204).

[[Page 64264]]

    Date and Time: December 11-13; 8:30 a.m. until 5 p.m.
    Place: Rooms 310, 360, 370, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Drs. Keith N. Crank, William B. Smith, and John 
Stufken Program Directors, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-8870.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals for the Statistics & 
Probability Program, as part of the selection process for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: October 23, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-27544 Filed 10-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
Exhbit 32.1

 

**Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of**

**Title 18 Of The United States Code**

 

I, J. Patrick Spainhour, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of The ServiceMaster Company, certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such Form10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of The ServiceMaster Company.

 

 

/s/ J. Patrick Spainhour

J. Patrick Spainhour

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

February 27, 2007

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The ServiceMaster Company and will be retained by The ServiceMaster Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
#### TUGGLE v. STATE.

No. 24070.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 2, 1948.

No appearance for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The conviction is upon a charge of driving on a public highway while intoxicated. The punishment was assessed at $100 fine and twenty days in jail.

' Appellant was driving on Highway 82 through Red River .County and became involved in some discussion about his driving with the prosecuting witness, who lived in Bonham, Fannin County. He drove around the prosecuting witness and went zig-zagging across the road so as to obstruct it. The wife of the witness asked appellant to let them pass and he cursed her. The witness turned into a farm yard and appellant, who was in front, turned back and followed him into the yard. After some discussion of the matter the witness was permitted to drive on and appellant was detained by two friends at the farm house who had known him for some time. A short time later he was taken into custody in a cafe in Detroit by a highway patrolman. This patrolman, together with the prosecuting witness and his wife, testified positively as to appellant’s drunken condition. It is true the officer did not see him on the highway, but it was shortly after the above related incident and there could be no question about his driving on the highway. His own witnesses testified to that.

Appellant did not testify but did present three witnesses who contradicted the evidence relating to his intoxicated condition. The jury had the matter before them and passed on the controverted issue.

The only complaint found in the record is an objection to the court’s failure to charge on circumstantial evidence. A special requested charge was presented to the court, who refused it. We think the court did not err in refusing this charge. The evidence is direct and positive. The circumstances of his driving wére taken into consideration, but that does not call for *a special requested charge when there is direct evidence on the subj ect.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Order entered August 5, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 14

- 00281

- CR

JOE BARRY FERGUSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Cou rt Cause No. F12

- 35370

- U



### O RDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any

other reason.

 The trial court shall firs t determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that effec t. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall det ermine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing the r eporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact,
any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAY S of the date

of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal
shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received,

whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTIC E