alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### McINTOSH *vs.*HOBEN.

ERROR TO CIRCUIT COURT, OZAUKEE COUNTY.

Heard January 13.]

[Decided January 13, 1860.

*Stay of Proceedings*— Practice.

A party will not be permitted to prosecute a cause of action in one form, while he is in default for not paying costs in the same cause in another form ; but the proceedings will be stayed on motion.

This case was brought *to*this court upon a writ of error from a judgment entered by the circuit court of Ozaukee county, upon an action upon the covenants of title in a deed for lands made by the plaintiff in error to the defendant in error, the defendant in error now moved for a stay of proceedings in this court, until the plaintiff here had paid him his costs in prior appeals, adjudged to him by this court in this same case, and also for costs on such appeals in the court below.

This motion was supported by an affidavit showing that the action was commenced April 17, 1857, and tried October 27th, from which McIntosh appealed to this court, which appeal was dismissed, under the rules for want of prosecution, and costs to the amount of $25 taxed in favor of Hoban. *A*second appeal was then taken, which was dismissed for want of prosecution, and costs to the amount of $25 again taxed. *401Afterwards a motion was made before the circuit court, to stay the proceedings *fii*that court, which was denied, and McIntosh was ordered to pay *$7*as costs. None of these sums had been paid although two executions had been issued and returned by the proper officer unsatisfied. The affidavit also averred that McIntosh had no property out of which the amount could be made.

*By the Court.*

The motion for a stay of proceedings must be granted. No excuse whatever is shown for the failure to prosecute the former appeals, and until the costs are paid, the present appeal must be deemed vexatious. The . power of staying proceedings until the costs of former suits or appeals are paid, is equitable in its nature, and intended to prevent the vaxatious multiplication-of suits. 1 John. Cases, 427; 3 Cow., 381; 4 Wend., 216. The facts here disclosed show a case in which the exercise of the power seems emin-' ently proper.

Ordered accordingly.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF BDO SEIDMAN, LLP**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-3 (No.333-36026, No. 333-64536, No. 333-74753, No. 333-76780, No. 333-100392, No. 333-102837, No. 333-108778, No. 333-104791 and No. 333-112165) and Forms S-8 (No. 333-38506, No. 333-32545, No. 333-65916, No. 333-65928, No. 333-102744 and the Form S-8filed on July 10, 2003 with respect to the Cardima, Inc. 2003 Stock Option Plan) of Cardima, Inc. of our report dated February 20, 2004, relating to the 2003 financial statements and schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K. Our report contains anexplanatory paragraph regarding the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. 

 

/S/    BDO SEIDMAN, LLP 

San Francisco 

 

March 30, 2004 

 

1
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Greenway Medical Supply Corp., as Assignee of Sauveur Prosper, Appellant,<br><br>against<br><br>ELRAC, Inc., Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Richard G. Latin, J.), entered July 29, 2014. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs. </p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The ground for the motion was that defendant had timely and properly denied the claim based upon the late submission of a claim form (<i>see</i> 11 NYCRR 65—2.4 [c]). </p><p>Contrary to plaintiff's argument on appeal, the affidavit submitted by defendant demonstrated that defendant had received the claim form at issue on December 6, 2010, more than five months after the supplies at issue had been provided. Furthermore, while plaintiff argues on appeal that its employee's affidavit, which was submitted in opposition to plaintiff's motion, was sufficient to establish that plaintiff had mailed its claim form within 45 days of the provision of the supplies, the affidavit has no probative value. The claim form was dated July 1, 2010 and the affidavit states, allegedly based upon the affiant's personal knowledge, that the claim form was mailed on June 23, 2010.</p><p>Plaintiff's final argument on appeal is similarly without merit (<a href="../2012/2012_51350.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Natural Therapy Acupuncture, P.C. v Interboro Ins. Co.</i>, 36 Misc 3d 135</a>[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 51350[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2012]).</p><p>Accordingly, the order is affirmed. </p><p>Aliotta, J.P., Pesce and Solomon, JJ., concur.</p><br>Decision Date: December 07, 2016<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
Order entered December 6, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00623-CR

MARIUS TYON MILES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F12-62415-U

ORDER

On December 5, 2016, court reporter Sasha Brooks filed seven volumes of reporter’s 

record in this appeal. Volume 7, entitled “Exhibit Index,” contains a listing of exhibit numbers 1 

through 88, their description, and the location where the exhibits were offered and admitted. The 

volume does not, however, contain any of the exhibits themselves.

Accordingly, we ORDER court reporter Sasha Brooks to file a corrected, properly 

bookmarked volume 7 containing the exhibits within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 297 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 297

 To make exclusive the authority of the Federal Government to regulate 
 the labeling of products made in the United States and introduced in 
        interstate or foreign commerce, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 8, 2021

Mr. Lee (for himself and Mr. King) introduced the following bill; which 
was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To make exclusive the authority of the Federal Government to regulate 
 the labeling of products made in the United States and introduced in 
        interstate or foreign commerce, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Reinforcing American-Made Products 
Act''.

SEC. 2. EXCLUSIVITY OF FEDERAL AUTHORITY TO REGULATE LABELING OF 
              PRODUCTS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES AND INTRODUCED IN 
              INTERSTATE OR FOREIGN COMMERCE.

    Section 320933 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act 
of 1994 (15 U.S.C. 45a) is amended--
            (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``To the extent'' 
        and inserting the following:
    ``(a) In General.--To the extent'';
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(b) Effect on State Law.--
            ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
        provisions of this section shall supersede any provisions of 
        the law of any State expressly relating to the extent to which 
        a product is introduced, delivered for introduction, sold, 
        advertised, or offered for sale in interstate or foreign 
        commerce with a `Made in the U.S.A.' or `Made in America' 
        label, or the equivalent thereof, in order to represent that 
        such product was in whole or substantial part of domestic 
        origin.
            ``(2) Enforcement.--Nothing in this section shall preclude 
        the application of the law of any State to the use of a label 
        not in compliance with subsection (a).''; and
            (3) in the third sentence of subsection (a), as so 
        designated by paragraph (1), by striking ``Nothing in this 
        section'' and inserting ``Except as provided in subsection (b), 
        nothing in this section''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.2

              SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

                            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 (the "Report") of China
Biopharmaceuticals Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter
ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof, I, HUANG Chentai, 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 results of operations of the Company.


Date:  November 19, 2007                  By: /s/ HUANG Chentai
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           HUANG Chentai
                                           Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 62 (Wednesday, April 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 17502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07426]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Federal Bureau of Investigation


Meeting of the Compact Council for the National Crime Prevention 
and Privacy Compact

AGENCY: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice.

ACTION: Meeting notice.

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

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to announce a meeting of the 
National Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact Council (Council) created 
by the National Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact Act of 1998 
(Compact). Thus far, the Federal Government and 30 states are parties 
to the Compact which governs the exchange of criminal history records 
for licensing, employment, and similar purposes. The Compact also 
provides a legal framework for the establishment of a cooperative 
federal-state system to exchange such records.
    The United States Attorney General appointed 15 persons from state 
and federal agencies to serve on the Council. The Council will 
prescribe system rules and procedures for the effective and proper 
operation of the Interstate Identification Index system for noncriminal 
justice purposes.
    Matters for discussion are expected to include:
    (1) Bureau of Indian Affairs Purpose Code X Proposal
    (2) Proposed Changes to the Noncriminal Justice Rap Back Policy and 
Implementation Guide
    (3) National Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact Ratification 
Checklist
    The meeting will be open to the public on a first-come, first-
seated basis. Any member of the public wishing to file a written 
statement with the Council or wishing to address this session of the 
Council should notify the Federal Bureau Of Investigation (FBI) Compact 
Officer, Mr. Gary S. Barron at (304) 625-2803, at least 24 hours prior 
to the start of the session. The notification should contain the 
individual's name and corporate designation, consumer affiliation, or 
government designation, along with a short statement describing the 
topic to be addressed and the time needed for the presentation. 
Individuals will ordinarily be allowed up to 15 minutes to present a 
topic.
    Dates and Times: The Council will meet in open session from 9 a.m. 
until 5 p.m., on May 13-14, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the Knoxville Marriott Hotel, 
501 East Hill Avenue, Knoxville, Tennessee, telephone 865-637-1234.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Inquiries may be addressed to Mr. Gary 
S. Barron, FBI Compact Officer, Module D3, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, 
Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306, telephone (304) 625-2803, facsimile 
(304) 625-2868.

    Dated: March 24, 2015.
Gary S. Barron,
FBI Compact Officer, Criminal Justice Information, Services Division, 
Federal Bureau of Investigation.
[FR Doc. 2015-07426 Filed 3-31-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4410-02-P
# C_2015368EN.01000102.xml

| 6.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 368/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 368/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7807 — Sun Capital/Finlays Horticulture)

(2015/C 368/02)

On 29 October 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7807. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7807. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
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.

December 7, 2016

Order 

December 7, 2016

153937(81)

LANCIA JEEP HELLAS S.A.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

CHRYSLER GROUP INTERNATIONAL LLC,

FIAT S.P.A., and FIAT GROUP AUTOMOBILES

S.P.A.,

Defendants-Appellees.

SC: 153937

COA: 329481

Oakland CC: 2014-142918-CZ

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of Professor Peter Linzer for leave to file 

a brief amicus curiae is GRANTED. The amicus brief submitted on December 1, 2016, 

is accepted for filing.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

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



         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350
of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), each of the undersigned
officers of NCO Group, Inc. (the "Company") does hereby certify with respect to
the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31,
20003 (the "Report") 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 Company.





Date:  March 12, 2004                                /s/ Michael J. Barrist
       --------------                                ------------------------
                                                     Michael J. Barrist
                                                     Chief Executive Officer


Date:  March 12, 2004                                /s/ Steven L. Winokur
       --------------                                ------------------------
                                                     Steven L. Winokur
                                                     Chief Financial Officer


         The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report
or as a separate disclosure document.



Page 1
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2849 

To stipulate that nothing in Federal law provides a Federal agency with 

the authority to mandate that an individual be inoculated by a COVID– 

19 vaccine. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2021 

Mr. LEE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To stipulate that nothing in Federal law provides a Federal 

agency with the authority to mandate that an individual 

be inoculated by a COVID–19 vaccine. 

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 ‘‘Prohibiting Forced 

5 Vaccination for COVID–19 Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2849 IS

1 SEC. 2. NO FEDERAL AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE VACCINA2 TION. 

3 Nothing in Federal law shall be construed to provide 

4 a Federal agency with the authority to mandate that an 

5 individual be inoculated by a COVID–19 vaccine. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2011-1158 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2010-SW-018-AD NPRM Revision response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
**EXHIBIT 32.1**








**CERTIFICATION**


Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. 1350


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





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of IMPART Media Group,
      Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Joseph
      F. Martinez, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 Company.








Date:   August
                8, 2007
            By:
            /s/Joseph
                F. MartinezJoseph
                F. MartinezChief
                Executive Officer





______________________





This
      certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.