alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### R. L. SMITH and W. M. SMITH *v.*ANNIE NEAL and others.

A devised as follows: “I give to my two grandsons, M and R, one hundred acres of land, including where I now live,” &c., “ and that my daughter P live where I now live for the space of ten years; and at the end of that time, the land and premises to belong to my two grandsons, or the heirs of IHeld, that after the expiration of ten years from the death of the testator, M and R, the children of I, who was dead, were entitled to the land.

This was a Civil aotioN in the nature of *Ejectment,*tried before *Schenck, J.*at Spring Term, 1875, of Rutherford Superior Court.

The plaintiffs claimed the land in controversy as devisees under the will of William Smith. It was agreed that the right of the plaintiffs to recover depended upon the construe*473tion of the will, and that the" Court should decide as to the construction.

It was in evidence that William Smith’s real estate consisted of the tract of land on which he lived, containing about three hundred and fifty-three acres. The testator lived near the center of the tract. James T. Smith lived in the northern part of the tract and that Jeremiah W. Smith, the father of the plaintiffs lived in an unenclosed field, in the Southeast corner of the tract. Jeremiah Smith “ was leader of the crop” in the lifetime of the testator, but the land was worked by all the family together. Polly Smith took possession of the house in which Jeremiah W. Smith lived, and remained in possession ten years, after which this action was brought.

The clause of the will, under which the plaintiffs claim reads as follows :

“ I give to my two grand-sons, Mat-thew and Richard Smith one hundred acres of land including where I now live, joining the land I have given to my son J. S. Smith ; and that my daughter Polly Smith live where Jeremiah W. Smith now lives for the space of ten years, and at the end of that time the land and premises to belong to my two grand-sons or the heirs of J. W. Smith.

The Court being of the opinion that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover, an issue as to damages was submitted toa jury and a verdict rendered, assessing the damages at three hundred dollars. And the Court thereupon gave judgment for the plaintiffs, from which judgment the defendants appealed.

*Shipp (&*Bailey, for the appellants.

*J. B. Ilohe*and *Battle <& So?i,*contra.

Settle, J.

William Smith intended to dispose of his whole estate by will.

There is nothing in the will or in the circumstances of the estate to induce ns to change the general rule.

The judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.

Per Curiam.

J udgment affirmed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                 JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                          21,811,405
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                   14,372,567
<ALLOWANCES>                      (356,021)
<INVENTORY>                      8,733,186
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                47,060,616
<PP&E>                          17,979,719
<DEPRECIATION>                  11,357,822
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  85,270,253
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           18,164,446
<BONDS>                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                      8,236,102
<COMMON>                            93,753
<OTHER-SE>                      64,307,442
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     2,532,945
<SALES>                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         0
<CGS>                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    1,086,111
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 168,312
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (1,623,741)
<INCOME-TAX>                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (1,623,741)
<DISCONTINUED>                     534,812
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                             0
<EPS-BASIC>                          (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                        (0.12


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal
quarter ended September 30, 2009 of Impax Laboratories, Inc.;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)
    
    [Intentionally omitted];(c)
    
    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; and(d)
    
    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; and
 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 the
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 (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; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.
 November 4, 2009
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Arthur A. Koch, Jr.

Arthur A. Koch, Jr.Senior Vice President, Finance, andChief Financial Officer
##### 



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 
COMMISSION,
    
    Case No.Plaintiff, 
          vs.
    
    CONSENT OF DEFENDANT
ENDOCARE, INC. TO ENTRY
OF FINAL JUDGMENT OF
PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND OTHER RELIEFENDOCARE, INC., KEVIN M. QUILTY, and JERRY W. ANDERSON,Defendants.
   a.
    
    permanently restrains and enjoins Endocare from
violations of: 1) Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (Securities




---



##### 



Act), 15 U.S.C. §77q(a); and 2) Sections 10(b), 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), and 13(b)(2)(B)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), 15 U.S.C. §§78j(b), 78m(a),
78m(b)(2)(A), and 78m(b)(2)(B), and Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-1,
13a-11, and 13a-13
thereunder, 17 C.F.R. §§240.10b-5, 240.12b-20, 240.13a-1,
240.13a-11, and
240.13a-13; andb.
    
    orders Endocare to pay a civil penalty in the amount of
$750,000 under Section 20(d)(l) of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. §77t(d)(l), and
Section 21(d)(3) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. §78u(d)(3).
     2




---



##### 



3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



5




---



##### 



DATED:July 14, 2006
    Endocare, Inc.By:
    /s/ Craig T. DavenportCraig T. Davenport Chairman of
the Board and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of Endocare, Inc. 201 Technology
Drive
 Irvine, CA 92618 July 14 Craig T. Davenport Endocare, Inc. Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
 /s/ Rosanne E. St. OngeNotary Public Commission expires: November 1, 2007
  /s/ Dan Marmalefsky
  6
EXHIBIT 32





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 Westmoore Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Kevin Wheeler, CEO 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.






Date: December 31, 2010
By: /s/ Kevin WheelerKevin Wheeler, Principal Executive and Financial Officer








[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.]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Office of the Under Secretary (Personnel and Readiness), DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act prohibits a landlord from evicting a Service member (or the Service member's family) from a residence during a period of military service except by court order. The law as originally passed by Congress applied to dwellings with monthly rents of $2,400 or less. The law requires the Department of Defense to adjust this amount annually to reflect inflation and to publish the new amount in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         January 1, 2015.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lt Col Ryan Oakley, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, (703) 571-9301.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

We have applied the inflation index required by the statute. The maximum monthly rental amount for 50 U.S.C. App. section 531 (a)(1)(A)(ii) as of January 1, 2015, will be $3,329.84.

 Dated: January 23, 2015.

Aaron Siegel,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2015-01568 Filed 1-27-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
Exhibit 32




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 Ameralink, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert Freiheit, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to 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 result of operations of the Company.




/s/  Robert Freiheit




Robert Freiheit


Chief Executive Officer


and Chief Financial Officer





March 30, 2011
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 17-12229

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:16-cr-20915-JEM-2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

 versus

GUINA SENAN LEON, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(February 15, 2018)

Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 17-12229 Date Filed: 02/15/2018 Page: 1 of 3 
2

Guina Senan Leon appeals her below-guidelines sentence of 27 months of 

imprisonment, which was imposed following her plea of guilty to conspiring to 

defraud health care benefit programs by submitting false claims by wire 

transmissions. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1349, 1343. Leon argues that her sentence is 

substantively unreasonable. We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion when it sentenced Leon to a 

term 14 months below the low end of her advisory guideline range. Leon served as 

the straw owner of two medical clinics that submitted to private insurance 

companies more than $20 million in false claims for medical services ostensibly 

prescribed by doctors. With a total offense level of 22, which included a two-level 

reduction for her minor role, United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual 

§ 3B1.2(b) (Nov. 2016), Leon faced an advisory guideline range of 41 to 51 

months of imprisonment. At the recommendation of the government, the district 

court varied downward and imposed a sentence of 27 months to account for Leon’s

substantial assistance. See id. § 5K1.1. Leon moved for a further reduction to 

account for her background and to achieve parity with the sentence imposed on 

another straw owner in a different scheme to defraud. Leon, who obtained degrees 

to serve as a nurse’s assistant and as a registered nurse and received $24,000 for 

serving as the registered officer and manager of the clinics, for obtaining

Case: 17-12229 Date Filed: 02/15/2018 Page: 2 of 3 
3

occupational licenses, for signing checks and forms, and for cashing checks for the 

owner of the two clinics, offered no evidence that her comparator had a “similar 

record[] . . . [and] ha[d] been found guilty of similar criminal conduct,” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 991(b)(1)(B). See United States v. Docampo, 573 F.3d 1091, 1101 (11th Cir.

2009). And the district court reasonably determined that a sentence of 27 months 

was required to deter further similar crimes, to reflect the seriousness of her

offense, and provide just punishment for her role in the conspiracy. See 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3553(a). Leon’s sentence, which is well below her statutory maximum penalty of 

20 years, is reasonable. See United States v. Croteau, 819 F.3d 1293, 1310 (11th 

Cir. 2016).

We AFFIRM Leon’s sentence.

Case: 17-12229 Date Filed: 02/15/2018 Page: 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal
quarter ended September 30, 2009 of Impax Laboratories, Inc.;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)
    
    [Intentionally omitted];(c)
    
    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; and(d)
    
    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; and
 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 the
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 (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;
and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.
 November 4, 2009
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Larry Hsu, Ph.D.Larry Hsu, Ph.D.President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              AUG-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   NOV-30-1996
<CASH>                                               7,974
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       55,678 <F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                          9,106
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   133,591
<PP&E>                                           1,576,243
<DEPRECIATION>                                     296,518
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,135,718
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,088,519
<BONDS>                                            826,837
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            21,050
<OTHER-SE>                                           6,250
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,135,718
<SALES>                                             28,198 <F1>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    87,041
<CGS>                                               27,490
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      188,012
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   542,018
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (33,334)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (676,323)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (642,989)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (676,323)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.14)

<FN>
<F1>Due to the results of an investigation, the Company eliminated $800,000 of
software revenue since it was determined that it has never delivered the
software even though it received $791,750 from two purported sublicensees for
said software.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
p.1 

OAR Box 1384 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

>

w

^r^33)ll-E-19 2%$) ll-EE- 3 

Docket Number: 

A-94-52 

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:11 AM Sheet 233 of 264 

i 
P.2 

OCT 16 '98 09:01 NORTH" END' COMPOSITES 

riv,-» Kir «c P.1 Igl 002 

T~ e- • 193 

Contact Report 

From: 

Date: 

Contact: 

Company: 

Shawn McKee, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) 

October 12,1998 

Mr. Jonathan Spaulding 

North End Composites, Inc. 

r 

•-»* AII'i'OCTT 

Telephone Number: (207) 594-8821 

Fax Number: (207) 594-1049 

Contact Summary: 

Mr. Jonathan Spaulding was contacted to clarify a statement made at the Soptember 11, 

1998 Small Business Open Molding Outreach Meeting for the Reinforced Plastics MACT 

Standard regarding the recommendation of gel coats made by Cook Composites and Polymers 

(CCP). In response to my questions Mr. Spaulding indicated the following: 

Mr. Spaulding indicated that he meant his statement meeting indicating that gel coal 

suppliers are not actively encouraging customers to switch to the newer, low HAP gel coats. 

North End Composites, Inc. uses RPawr-Associates as its supplier for CCP gel coats. KP^af 

Associates has not discouraged North End Composites. Inc. from purchasing and using CCP gel 

coats containing lower amounts of monomers that are hazardous air pollutants (HAP). RP-_ed 

Associates has also not actively encouraged North End Composites, Inc. to purchase and use a 

lower HAP gel coat. 

Mr. Spaulding added that North End Composites,. Inc. would not be opposed to trying a 

low HAP gel coat, but they are hesitant to do so without seeing the results of trade studies 

showing that the low HAP gel coats have similar properties to the higher HAP gel cwats. 

i$[%£ 4o h. WoeJ/ *7\ 

oxrc or\ W CfQVMJC -Tl<<,££ > 

J 

INFORMATION IS ACCURATE