alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON 

GARY L. MCCOY, 

 Plaintiff, Case No. 3:17-cv-432 

vs. 

DR. RODNEY L. CARLSON, et al., District Judge Thomas M. Rose 

 Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman 

 Defendants. 

______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER AND ENTRY: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF 

THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. 151); AND (2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTIONS TO PARTIALLY DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S FOURTH AMENDED 

COMPLAINT (DOCS. 128, 139) 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Michael J. 

Newman (Doc. 151), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The parties 

have not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time for filing such objections 

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: (1) the Report 

and Recommendation (Doc. 151) is ADOPTED in full; and (2) Defendants’ motions to partially 

dismiss Plaintiffs’ fourth amended complaint (doc. 128, 139) are GRANTED. This case shall 

continue with regard to Plaintiff’s remaining claims. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: February 11, 2020 *s/Thomas M. Rose 

 Thomas M. Rose 

 United States District Judge
#### In the Matter of Christopher Faunteleroy, Respondent, v Tanya Mercado, Appellant.

[772 NYS2d 562]

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Rood, R.), dated April 2, 2003, as, after a hearing, transferred custody of the child from her to the father.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Where a court has conducted a complete evidentiary hearing, its finding must be accorded great weight on appeal, and its award of custody should be allowed to stand unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record *(see Matter of Lynch v Acey,*281 AD2d 483 [2001]; *Matter of Coakley v Goins,*240 AD2d 573 [1997]; *Conti v Conti,*149 AD2d 395 [1989]). The essential consideration in making an award of custody is the best interests of the child *(see Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167, *483171 [1982]; *Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer,*55 NY2d 89 [1982]). The court may require a change of custody if the totality of the circumstances warrants a modification and such a change is in the best interests of the child *(see Eschbach v Eschbach, supra; Matter of Schimler v Schimler,*203 AD2d 580 [1994]). Factors to be considered in determining the child’s best interests include “the quality of the home environment and the parental guidance the custodial parent provides for the child . . . the ability of each parent to provide for the child’s emotional and intellectual development . . . the financial status and ability of each parent to provide for the child . . . the relative fitness of the respective parents, and the length of time the present custody arrangement has been in effect” *(Matter of Lobo v Muttee,*196 AD2d 585, 587 [1993] [internal quotation marks omitted]; *Matter of Krebsbach v Gallagher,*181 AD2d 363, 364-365 [1992]; *see also Eschbach v Eschbach, supra).*The stability and companionship to be gained from keeping children together is also an important factor for a court to consider *(see Eschbach v Eschbach, supra*at 173). Moreover, a court should be mindful that “the existence or absence of any one factor cannot be determinative on appellate review since the court is to consider the totality of the circumstances” *(Eschbach v Eschbach, supra*at 174).

Here, the hearing court had the opportunity to observe the mother and the father over an extended period, received testimony from numerous individuals, including the parties and a social worker, and interviewed the child in camera. Based on the record, the hearing court weighed the appropriate factors and properly awarded custody to the father *(see Matter of Canazon v Canazon,*215 AD2d 652 [1995]; *Kuncman v Kuncman, 188*AD2d 517 [1992]). Smith, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Adams, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

LARRY D

. MARVEL

,

Defendant

- Below,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE,

Plaintiff

- Below

, Appellee. §

§

§

§ No. 295, 2014

§

§ Court Below

— Superior Court

§ of the State of Delaware,

§ in and for New Castle County

§ Cr. ID 0510007925

§

§

Submitted: June 5, 2014

Decided: June 2 6 , 2014

Before STRINE

, Chief Justice, HOLLAND

, and RIDGELY , Justices

.

O R D E R

This 2 6 th day of June 2014

, after careful consideration of the opening brief

and the State’s motion to affirm , we find it manifest that the judgment below

should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court = s well

- reasoned decision

dated May 5, 2014 . The Superior Court did not err in concluding that appellant’s

fourth motion for postconviction relief was procedurally barred and that appellant

had failed to overcome the procedural hurdles.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior

Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Leo E. Strine, Jr.

Chief Justice
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 2202]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00520]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #17286 and #17287; KENTUCKY Disaster Number KY-
00087]


Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the 
Commonwealth of Kentucky

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 4.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the Commonwealth of Kentucky (FEMA-4630-DR), dated 
12/12/2021.
    Incident: Severe Storms, Straight-line Winds, Flooding, and 
Tornadoes.
    Incident Period: 12/10/2021 through 12/11/2021.

DATES: Issued on 01/06/2022.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 02/10/2022.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 09/12/2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, dated 12/12/2021, is 
hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as 
beginning 12/10/2021 through 12/11/2021.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Barbara Carson,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2022-00520 Filed 1-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-03-P
#### The People on the relation of James S. Dewey v. The Board of State Auditors.

*Board of state auditors: Independent tribunal: Mandamus.*The hoard of state auditors are made by the constitution an independent tribunal over •which the courts haye no supervisory control; and the supreme court has no jurisdiction by *mandamus*to coorce or direct their action.

*Heard and decided June 9.*

Application for *Mandamus.*

The writ of *mandamus*is sought in this case to require the respondents to act upon a claim of the relator for extra compensation for services performed in the compilation of the Compiled Laws of 1871, in accordance with the provisions of a joint resolution of the legislature of 1875.

*192
      *F. A. Baker,*for relator, applied, *ex parte,*for an order to show cause.

The Coubt

held that by the constitution the respondents are made a separate and independent tribunal, over which the supreme court has no supervisory control, and no jurisdiction by *mandamus*to coerce or direct their action.

Order to show cause denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:17-cr-266 (1)

Judge Marbley

Kenneth B. Vaughn 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 36) that the

defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The Court accepts the

defendant’s plea of guilty to a lesser included offense of Count 1,

and he is hereby adjudged guilty on this count. The Court will

defer the decision of whether to accept the plea agreement until

the sentencing hearing.

Date: July 17, 2018 s\Algenon L. Marbley 

 Algenon L. Marbley

 United States District Judge

Case: 2:17-cr-00266-ALM Doc #: 41 Filed: 07/17/18 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 127
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 10.a.1

                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 BE Semiconductor
Industries N.V. (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, Richard W. Blickman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.


Dated:  March 31, 2003                     /s/ Richard W. Blickman
                                           -----------------------

                                           Richard W. Blickman
                                           Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Clicker Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending May 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Albert Aimers, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 and 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.





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





Date:  July 20, 2010
By:
/s/ ALBERT AIMERSAlbert Aimers

Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 43 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal the Medicare 

outpatient rehabilitation therapy caps. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 6, 2009 

Mr. BECERRA (for himself, Mr. BLUNT, and Mr. ROSS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal 

the Medicare outpatient rehabilitation therapy caps. 

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 ‘‘Medicare Access to 

5 Rehabilitation Services Act of 2009’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 43 IH

1 SEC. 2. OUTPATIENT THERAPY CAP REPEAL. 

2 Section 1833 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

3 1395(l)) is amended by striking subsection (g). 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : 

 Plaintiff, : Case Number 3:17-MJ-506 

 

 -vs- : Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman 

 

WILLIAM PRIGMORE : 

 

 Defendant. : 

 ORDER FOR LIMITED UNSEALING 

 Upon motion of the United States, and for good cause shown, the United States is hereby 

authorized to provide Nicholas Gounaris , Counsel for Defendant, a copy of the sealed Criminal 

Complaint, Affidavit and Arrest Warrant for review with his client, William Prigmore, without 

further dissemination or copying of these items. Further, these items shall remain under seal 

until such time as ordered by the Court. 

October 24, 2017 s/Michael J. Newman 

 

 Michael J. Newman 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

 

Case: 3:17-cr-00187-WHR Doc #: 7 Filed: 10/24/17 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 27
**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**

|   | (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/                 *Jonathan                Lewis*                                                         |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Jonathan                Lewis, M.D., Ph.D.Principal                Executive OfficerJuly                30, 2008 |

----
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON 

CLIFFORD BAILEY, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, : Case No. 3:17-cv-332 

 

 District Judge Thomas M. Rose 

- vs - Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz 

VERSO CORPORATION, 

 Defendant. : 

 RECUSAL ORDER 

 This case was randomly assigned to the undersigned upon its filing in September 2017. 

The expiration of my term of office occurs March 1, 2018. Therefore, I recuse myself from 

further judicial participation in this case and direct the Clerk to randomly reassign the case to one 

of the other Magistrate Judges resident at Dayton. 

November 13, 2017. 

 s/ Michael R. Merz

 United States Magistrate Judge
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. §§1350)


Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §§1350),
the undersigned, James Stewart, Chief Financial Officer of
Capital Group One, Inc., a Florida corporation (the
Company), does hereby certify, to his knowledge,
that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
quarter ended November 30, 2002 of the Company (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

|                       |  |                                                               
|---------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 4, 2003 |  | By: /s/ James StewartJames Stewart
    Chief Financial Officer
17464

#### G. F. SANDERS, Respondent, v. The JASPER COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION by H. A. Wall, County Superintendent of Education, Appellant.

(105 S. E. (2d) 201)

*415
      *Messrs. Warren & Warren,*of Hampton, *for Appellant.*

*D. N. Rivers, Esq.,*of Ridgeland, *for Respondent,*

October 13, 1958.

*Per Curiam.*

This is an appeal from a judgment for damages for the breach of a contract for the transportation of children to school. For many years respondent performed such service for the appellant Board pursuant to a written contract which was extended from time to time. The terms of it were ambiguous and the Board contended that it expired in 1952, which respondent denied. The Board refused to comply with the contract agreeably to respondent’s construction of it and he brought this action. The court submitted the issue of the date of the termination of the contract to the jury which found in favor of respondent and returned verdict, the amount of which is not questioned in the appeal. The usual defensive motions were overruled.

Substituted counsel have presented the appeal upon printed brief, without oral argument. It is said in it with respect to the exceptions taken by the predecessor counsel: “It will therefore be seen that an examination of the testimony and exhibits will be necessary in the light of the exceptions in the consideration of the appeal, and we therefore respectfully submit the same to the court.” This is not argument of the exceptions and they must be deemed to have been abandoned.

The brief then proceeds to argue that under sections 21-837 and 21-838 of the Code of 1952 the State Educational Finance Commission “took over” all school bus transportation, operation and contracts, and as*416serts: “We contend that the State Educational Finance Commission took over all such contracts and the appellants are in no wise liable, hence the exceptions claiming contract expiration and nonliability of appellant are applicable.” Search of the record discloses that this position was not taken in the answer or at any stage of the trial or in the motions for judgment *n. o. v.*and new trial, hence it is unavailable upon appeal.

Judgment affirmed.
# APPENDIX 

# VI

## IDAHO HANDLER ACTIVITY COUNT REPORT' March 13, 2008 Total Numberof Handlers (includes inactive/non-notifiersites) 2,301 Total NumberofActive Generators 1,178 Large Quantity Generators 29 Small Quantity Generators 95 Conditional Exempt SQGs 1,054 HWTransporters 54 Subject to CEI Universe (Calculated Universe) 11 BIFs Incinerators Land Disposers Treatment/Storage 

# o o 10



### 3
Used 

### Oil Fuel Handlers (Notifiers) 50 1st Spec Marketers Off-Spec Burners Off-Spec Marketers Processers/Re-Refiners Transporters 24 11 10



### 7 33
Universal Waste Handlers (Idaho Department ofAgriculture) 18

,
File: Source: Resource Conservation and RecoveryAct Information (RCRAlnfo), Idaho State Notifiers Database (generated from the Notification of Regulated Waste Activity Forms [8700-12] submitted to DEQ). IH (RCRA Admin)
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4432 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4432

    To direct the Securities and Exchange Commission to revise its 
 reporting requirements to require public companies to report certain 
expenditures made to influence public opinion on any matter other than 
          the promotion of the company's products or services.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 13, 2010

 Mr. Grayson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To direct the Securities and Exchange Commission to revise its 
 reporting requirements to require public companies to report certain 
expenditures made to influence public opinion on any matter other than 
          the promotion of the company's products or services.

    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 ``Corporate Propaganda Sunshine Act''.

SEC. 2. REPORTING OF EXPENDITURES.

    Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
Securities and Exchange Commission shall revise its regulations issued 
pursuant to sections 13 and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m and 78o(d)) to require that issuers include in the 
reports required under those sections any expenditure or series of 
expenditures of the issuer totaling $1,000 or more made for the purpose 
of influencing public opinion on any matter other than the promotion of 
the issuer's products or services. Such disclosures shall include the 
date, amount, and purpose of the expenditure and identify (by name, 
address, and phone number) the person to whom it was made.
                                 <all>
```
2012 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

5-21-2012 

# W i l son v . S up e r in t e nde n t S C I H un t in gdon

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al

D ock e t N o . 11-1720

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2012

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2012 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du

. R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" W i l s on v . S u pe r in t e nde n t S C I H un t in g don " (2012). 2012 D e cisio n s

. P a pe r 966. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2012/966

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

__________ No. 11

- 1720

__________ FRED WILSON, Appellant

v.
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCI HUNTINGDON; THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA;

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

__________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. No. 2

- 09

- cv
- 04797) District Judge: The Honorable John R. Padova
ARGUED April 17, 2012
BEFORE: SCIRICA, AMBRO, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges
(Opin ion Filed May 16, 2012)

__________ ORDER AMENDING OPINION

__________ It is ordered that the opinion in the above case, filed on May 16, 2012, be amended as follows:
On the first page of the caption, delete “[Argued]” after Adrian N. Roe, Esq.

This a mendment does not change the date of filing, May 16, 2012.
By the Court,

Circuit Judge /s/ Richard L. Nygaard

Dated: 21 May 2012