alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### DAVIDSON v. STATE.

No. 18188.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 15, 1936.

A. A. Dawson, of Canton, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is possession of whisky for the purpose of sale; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

Pending appeal, the law under which appellant was convicted has been repealed.

The judgment is reversed, and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 11, 2022

No. 04-20-00151-CV

John PORTERFIELD,

Appellant

v.

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY,

Appellee

From the 451st Judicial District Court, Kendall County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18-366

Honorable Kirsten Cohoon, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

 Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

 Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

 Irene Rios, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

 Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

 Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

Appellee’s motion for en banc reconsideration is DENIED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.5. 

Appellee’s request for oral argument is also DENIED.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 11th day of January, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

FILE COPY
# Find People

### Pagination

-                Current page            1 
-                Page            2 
-  Next page›› 
-  Last pageLast » 

## A-Z

        - A (425)
        - B (953)
        - C (821)
        - D (506)
        - E (208)
        - F (310)
        - G (600)
        - H (782)
        - I (74)
        - J (277)
        - K (456)
        - L (565)
        - M (937)
        - N (208)
        - O (155)
        - P (575)
        - Q (26)
        - R (551)
        - S (1093)
        - T (403)
        - U (38)
        - V (129)
        - W (627)
        - X (23)
        - Y (117)
        - Z (104)
**Exhibit 35.2**

 

**Servicer Compliance Statement of Deere Credit Services, Inc.**

 

I, James A. Israel, President of Deere Credit Services, Inc., certify:

 

A review of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s activities for the period from September 5, 2012 (the date of issuance of the John Deere Owner Trust 2012-B transaction subject to the requirements of Regulation AB) through October 31, 2012 (the “Reporting Period”) and of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of September 5, 2012 among John Deere Capital Corporation, John Deere Receivables, Inc. and John Deere Owner Trust 2012-B has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge based on such review, Deere Credit Services, Inc. has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 
| Date:   January 11, 2013 | Deere   Credit Services, Inc. |
|-------------------------------|------------------------------------|
|                          |                               |
|                          |                               |
|                          |                               |
|                          | By                            | */s/   James A. Israel* |   |
|                          |                               |   |
|                          |                               | James   A. Israel |
|                          |                               |   |
|                          |                               | President |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6181

SHAPAT AHDAWAN NABAYA, a/k/a Norman Abbott,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

U.S. ATTORNEY,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Richmond. Roderick Charles Young, Magistrate Judge. (3:17-cv-00731-MHL-RCY)

Submitted: June 21, 2018 Decided: June 26, 2018

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

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shapat Ahdawan Nabaya, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Shapat Ahdawan Nabaya seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order directing 

him to file his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition on the proper form. After Nabaya filed 

the proper form and noted his appeal, the district court dismissed his § 2241 petition 

without prejudice. 

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 

(2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). 

When a notice of appeal is premature, the entry of final judgment can cure the resulting 

jurisdictional defect under the doctrine of cumulative finality but only if the order being 

appealed could have been certified for intermediate appeal under Rule 54(b). In re 

Bryson, 406 F.3d 284, 287-89 (4th Cir. 2005); Equip. Fin. Grp. v. Traverse Computer 

Brokers, 973 F.2d 345, 347 (4th Cir. 1992).

The order Nabaya seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable 

interlocutory or collateral order. Further, because the district court could not have 

certified the challenged order for immediate appeal under Rule 54(b), the cumulative 

finality doctrine does not apply. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, deny Nabaya’s motion to compel, and dismiss the appeal for lack of 

jurisdiction. 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.

DISMISSED
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OFPRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT

TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Power Medical Interventions, Inc. (the“Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned, Michael P. Whitman, the President and Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|                   | /s/ Michael P.  Whitman                |
|------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                   | Michael P.  Whitman                    |
|                   | President and  Chief Executive Officer |
|                   | (Principal  Executive Officer)         |
|                   |                                   |
| November 14, 2008 |                                   |

 

----
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 23, 2024. 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, May 23, 2024 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A24A1437. BIBB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT v. IVORI BENNETT.
Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion be hereby GRANTED, and jurisdiction is released back to the trial court upon receipt of this order.
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6181

SHAPAT AHDAWAN NABAYA, a/k/a Norman Abbott , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. U.S. ATTORNEY , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond

. Roderick Charles Young , Magistrate Judge. ( 3:17

- cv - 00731

- MHL

- RCY )

Submitted : June 21, 2018 Decided: June 26, 2018

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

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Shapat Ahdawan Nabaya, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Shapat Ahdawa n Nabaya seeks to appeal the ma gistrate judge’ s order directing him to file his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition on the proper form . After Nabaya filed the proper form and noted his appeal, the district court dismissed his § 2241 petition without prejudice. This court may exercise ju risdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541, 545

- 46 (1949). When a notice of appeal is pre mature, the entry of final judgment can cure the resulting jurisdictional defect under the doctrine of cumulative finality but only if the order being appealed could have been certified for intermediate appeal under Rule 54(b). In re Bryson , 406 F.3d 284, 287

- 89 (4th Cir. 2005); Equip. Fin. Grp. v. Traverse Computer Brokers , 973 F.2d 345, 347 (4th Cir. 1992). The order Nabaya seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Further, because the district court c ould not have certified the challenged order for immediate appeal under Rule 54(b), the cumulative finality doctrine does not apply. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Nabaya’s motion to compel, and dismiss the appeal for lack o f jurisdiction. 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.
DISMISSED
Exhibit 35.2

[First Republic Bank Logo]

Feb 29, 2016

Servicer Compliance Statement

For SEMT 2012-4 (see Schedule A)

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of First Republic Bank (the Servicer), does hereby certify that:



| | (i) | a review of the Servicers activities during the reporting period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 and of its performance under the Agreement (as defined on Schedule A attached hereto) from
the above referenced trust during such period has been made under such officers supervision, and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | to the best of such officers knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout such reporting period.
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



First Republic BankBy:

/s/ Lionel AntunesName:

Lionel AntunesTitle:

Vice President of Residential LendingDate:

Feb. 29, 2016




---

<for SEMT 2012-4>

SCHEDULE A



| | 1. | Flow Mortgage Loan Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2010, between Redwood Residential Acquisition Corporation and First Republic Bank, as modified by the Reconstitution Agreement dated
September 21, 2012 (the Agreement).
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AND EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(b)
AND 15d-14(b)




(Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)




Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”), does
hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:




The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 of the
Company fully complies, in all material respects, with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the
information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.




Dated:
May 14, 2010


By:
            /s/
      Cheng ZhengName:
      Cheng ZhengTitle:
      Chief Executive Officer




Dated:
May 14, 2010


By:
            /s/
      Jacky LamName:
      Jacky LamTitle:
      Principal Financial Officer
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10211 Conference Calendar

RICHARD ALLEN SWARTZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus FIRST WORTHING MANAGEMENT ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:95-CV-2784-T

- - - - - - - - - - August 19, 1998 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The motion by Richard Allen Swartz, Texas inmate #382337, to consolidate appeals is DENIED. Swartz seeks to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP) the dismissal for frivolousness of his civil rights complaint. Swartz is BARRED by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) from proceeding IFP because, on at least three prior occasions while incarcerated, Swartz has brought an action or appeal in a United States Court that was dismissed for frivolousness, for maliciousness, or for failure toNo. 98-10211 -2- state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Patton v. Jefferson Correctional Ctr. , 136 F.3d 458, 462-64 (5th Cir. 1998); Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996); see also Swartz v. Kennedy , No. 96-10982 (5th Cir. June 12, 1997) (unpublished) (two strikes); Swartz v. Texas Bd. of Pardons & Paroles , No. 96-11047 (5th Cir. June 12, 1997) (unpublished) (two strikes). Accordingly, Swartz’s IFP status is DECERTIFIED. He may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is in prison unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). This appeal is DISMISSED. Swartz has 15 days from the date of this opinion to pay the full appellate filing fee of $105 to the clerk of the district court, should he wish to reinstate his appeal.
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE DENIED. IFP DECERTIFIED. APPEAL DISMISSED.
ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

COMM 2012-CCRE3

The undersigned, duly authorized officers of Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as the Certificate Administrator (a “Certifying Servicer”) under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement,
dated as of October 1, 2012 (the “Agreement”), by and among, Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, as
Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National
Association, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Certificate
Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian, and Situs Holdings, LLC, as Operating Advisor, here by certifies in accordance with
Section 10.11 of the Agreement:



| | A) | A review of such Certifying Servicer’s activities from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018 (the “reporting period”)
and of such Certifying Servicer’s performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer’s supervision and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | B) | That, as to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, such Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all its
obligations under the Agreement, in all material respects during the reporting period.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS

as Certificate Administrator



/s/ Ronaldo Reyes

BY: Ronaldo Reyes

Title: Vice President

Date: March 1, 2019



/s/ Karlene Collins

BY: Karlene Collins

Title: Assistant Vice President

Date: March 1, 2019
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 Quarterly Report of Pop Starz Records, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Adam Wasserman, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to SS. 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/ Adam Wasserman
                                        ------------------
                                        Adam Wasserman,
                                        Chief Financial Officer
May 15, 2008

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.
MP

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0370

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MICKEY RODNEY PAYNE,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellees’ motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time 

to and including November 12, 2020, within which to prepare, serve, and file its 

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 6 2020

10/06/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0370
(logo) Rialto

      CAPITAL 

 

 

2015 Annual Statement of Servicer Compliance (Item 1123)

 

Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) dated as of September 1, 2012 by and among Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC as Special Servicer, TriMont Real Estate Advisors, Inc. as Trust Advisor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Certificate Administrator, as Tax Administrator and as Custodian and U.S. Bank National Association as Trustee relating to the Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2012-LC5, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2012-LC5 (WFCM 2012-LC5)

      

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the “Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:

 

1. All servicing activities and performance of such servicing activities under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement are performed on behalf of the Special Servicer.

 

2. A review of the servicing activities and performance by the Special Servicer for the period of January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015 (the “Reporting Period”) in accordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under my supervision.

 

3. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in all material respects for the Reporting Period and if there has been a failure to fulfill any such obligations in any material respect, each failure and the nature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certified by: /s/ Adam Singer                   Date: March 1, 2016

Adam Singer, Managing Director
10.1 Amendment to Employment Agreement - Michael Barth


















AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, dated as of June 1, 2014 (the “Amendment”) by and among DSIT SOLUTIONS LTD. (“DSIT”), ACORN ENERGY, INC., a Delaware corporation (with its successors and assigns, referred to as the “Corporation”) and MICHAEL H. BARTH, hereinafter referred to as “Barth.”


Preliminary Statement


DSIT and Barth previously entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of August 1, 2009 (the “Agreement”), as the same may have been amended, pursuant to which the Corporation reimburses DSIT for 75% of the salary and benefits payable to Mr. Barth thereunder.  DSIT, the Corporation and Mr. Barth desire to amend the Agreement as set forth herein.


Agreement


The parties therefore agree as follows:


		
	1.
	Restoration of Prior Reduction in Contribution from the Corporation.  The Corporation reimburses DSIT for 75% of Barth’s salary (the “Acorn Component”) and related costs.  Effective January 1, 2014, the Acorn Component (and accordingly Barth’s salary) was reduced by $10,000 per annum (the “Reduction”).  The parties now wish to restore the Reduction and hereby agree that effective June 1, 2014, the Acorn Component (as in effect following the Reduction) shall be increased by $10,000 per annum (thereby increasing Barth’s salary by such amount).




		
	2.
	Ratification.  The parties hereby ratify and confirm the terms of the Agreement as amended hereinabove.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.


/s/                    DSIT SOLUTIONS, LTD.
Michael H. Barth
                    
By:              /s/            
Benny Sela
Title: President & CEO


ACORN ENERGY, INC.


By:              /s/            
John A. Moore
Title: President & CEO