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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

Tanker Pacific Chartering (2) Ltd., 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

Lukoil Pan-Americas LLC 

 Defendant, 

and 

Chevron USA Inc. 

Citgo Petroleum Corp 

Trafigura AG 

Trafigura Trading LLC 

Exxonmobil Sales and Supply LLC 

Valero Marketing and Supply Company, 

 Garnishees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. ___________________ 

District Judge: _____________________ 

Magistrate Judge: __________________ 

IN ADMIRALTY 

PROCESS OF MARITIME 

ATTACHMENT AND 

GARNISHMENT 

To Garnishee: Trafigura Trading LLC 

Serve on Resident Agent: 

CT CORPORATION SYSTEM 

4400 EASTON COMMONS WAY SUITE 125 

COLUMBUS,OH 43219 

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

UNITED STATES MARSHAL FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. 

GREETING: 

WHEREAS, on April 26, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Verified Complaint against Defendant 

Lukoil Pan-Americas LLC for reasons in said complaint mentioned for the sum of at least 

$985,806 (herein, the “Garnishment Amount”) and praying for process of marine attachment and 

garnishment against the property of said Defendant; and 

Case: 2:18-cv-00400-MHW-CMV Doc #: 1-6 Filed: 04/26/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 42
2 

WHEREAS, this process is issued pursuant to such prayer and requires that Garnishee 

shall serve Garnishee’s answer within twenty-one (21) days after service of process upon the 

Garnishee and requires that Defendant shall serve its answer within thirty (30) days after process 

has been executed, whether by attachment of property or service on the Garnishee, 

NOW, THEREFORE, you are hereby commanded that if the said Defendant cannot be 

found within the District you are directed to attach and garnish the property indicated below and 

how you shall have executed this process, make known to this Court with your certificate of 

execution thereof written: 

DESCRIPTION 

All goods, chattels, credits and effects, tangible or intangible 

property of Lukoil Pan-Americas LLC or any other funds held on 

behalf of Lukoil Pan-Americas LLC by Garnishee. 

WITNESS THE HONORABLE Judge of said Court, in said District, this ___ day of April, 2018. 

Richard W. Nagel, CLERK 

BY: _______________________ 

Deputy Clerk 

NOTE: This process is issued pursuant to Rule B(1) of the Supplemental Rules for Certain 

Admiralty and Maritime Claims of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Case: 2:18-cv-00400-MHW-CMV Doc #: 1-6 Filed: 04/26/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 43
<page>	            EXHIBIT 31.01

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jeffrey A. Rothman, President of Demeter Management Corporation
("Demeter"), the general partner of the registrant, certify that:

1.		I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the
registrant;

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)	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

c)	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



<page>
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 Demeter'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.




Date:  November 14, 2003     /s/ Jeffrey A. Rothman
                                 Jeffrey A. Rothman
                                 President,
                                 Demeter Management Corporation,
                                 general partner of the registrant
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1739

SANAM THAPA, Petitioner,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted: July 22, 2009 Decided: August 10, 2009

Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran, LAW OFFICE OF VISUVANATHAN RUDRAKUMARAN, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Michael F. Hertz, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Ernesto H. Molina, Jr., Assistant Director, Anthony P. Nicastro, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: Sanam Thapa, a native and citizen of Nepal, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Before this court, Thapa first challenges the determination that he failed to establish his eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. EliasZacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Thapa fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Accordingly, we cannot grant the relief that he seeks. Additionally, we uphold the denial of Thapa’s request for withholding of removal. “Because the burden of proof for withholding of removal is higher than for asylum--even though the facts that must be proved are the same--an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).” Camara v. Ashcroft , 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). Because Thapa failed to show

23 that he is eligible for asylum, he cannot meet the higher standard for withholding of removal. Finally, Thapa contends that he is entitled to protection under the Convention Against Torture. In his brief before this court, he argues that the government of Nepal is willfully blind to the torture committed by “low-level Maoists” and therefore has “acquiesced” in such torture. We are without jurisdiction to consider this claim because Thapa failed to challenge the denial of his request for protection under the Convention Against Torture on this precise ground before the

Board. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2006); Massis v. Mukasey , 549 F.3d 631, 638-40 (4th Cir. 2008). We therefore dismiss the petition for review in part. Accordingly, we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART
<page>           EXHIBIT 31.01

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jeffrey A. Rothman, President of Demeter Management Corporation
("Demeter"), the general partner of the registrant, certify that:

1.		I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the
registrant;

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)	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

c)	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
<page> 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 Demeter'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.




Date:  November 15, 2004     /s/ Jeffrey A. Rothman
                                 Jeffrey A. Rothman
                                 President,
                                 Demeter Management Corporation,
                                 general partner of the registrant
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AS OF DECEMBER  31, 1998 AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH BALANCE SHEET.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         797978
<NAME>                        FFCA INVESTOR SERVICES CORPORATION 86-B
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                                 100
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         200
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               100
<OTHER-SE>                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           200
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          0
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                             0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.3


                           CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF

                      RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF

                                J2 COMMUNICATIONS


               James Jimirro and Gary Cowan, respectively, certify that:

               1. Messrs. Jimirro and Cowan are the president and Chief
Financial Officer, respectively, of J2 Communications, a California corporation
(the "Corporation").


               2. The Board of Directors of the Corporation has approved
amending Article (IV) (a) of the Articles of Incorporation in the entirety as
follows:


                IV.     Capital.

                        (a)     The corporation is authorized to issue two (2)
                                classes of shares designated as "Preferred
                                Stock" and "Common Stock" respectively. The
                                number of shares of Preferred Stock authorized
                                to be issued is 2 million (2,000,000) and the
                                number of shares of Common Stock authorized to
                                be issued is 15 million (15,000,000).


               3. This amendment has been approved by the required vote of the
shareholders in accordance with Sections 902 and 903 of the California
Corporations Code. The Corporation has not issued any preferred stock, and thus
has only one class of stock outstanding, its Common Stock. Each outstanding
share of common stock is entitled to one vote. The Corporation had 1,939,400
shares of Common Stock outstanding. The number of shares of Common Stock voting
in favor of the amendment exceed the vote required, in that the affirmative vote
of 1,074,014 shares, or 55% approved the amendment.


                                        /s/James Jimirro
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        James Jimirro, President


                                        /s/Gary Cowan
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Gary Cowan, Chief Financial Officer


        Each of James Jimirro and Gary Cowan declare under penalty of perjury
under the laws of the State of California that they have read the foregoing
certificate and know the contents thereof and that the same is true of their own
knowledge.

<PAGE>   2

Dated:  July 9, 1993                               /s/James Jimirro
                                                   James Jimirro


                                                   /s/Gary Cowan
                                                   Gary Cowan
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6747

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

CHARLES ELOYS JOHNSON, a/k/a Adam White,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (2:15-cr-00386-RMG-1)

Submitted: February 27, 2024 Decided: March 1, 2024

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Eloys Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6747 Doc: 10 Filed: 03/01/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles Eloys Johnson appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for 

compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have reviewed the 

record on appeal and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying 

Johnson’s motion. See United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021) 

(providing standard). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. 

Johnson, No. 2:15-cr-00386-RMG-1 (D.S.C. July 6, 2023). 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.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6747 Doc: 10 Filed: 03/01/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
* The Hon. Cynthia Holcomb Hall, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth

Circuit, sitting by designation.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ Nos. 98-1438EA, 98-1886EA

___________ Todd E. Rooney, * * Plaintiff-Appellee, * * On Appeal from the v. * United States District Court * for the Eastern District of * Arkansas. George Williamson, * * Defendant-Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: November 18, 1998 Filed: February 10, 1999

___________ Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, FAGG, and HALL, * Circuit Judges.

___________ RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Circuit Judge. This case arises under the Arkansas Securities Act, Ark. Code Ann. §23-42- 501(1) (1994), which requires that securities sold in Arkansas be registered. Todd Rooney bought all the stock in an automobile dealership in Blytheville, Arkansas, from George Williamson. The stock was not registered. After a bench trial, the1 The Hon. Stephen Reasoner, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Arkansas. -2- District Court, 1 ordered that the sale be rescinded. Under the court's decree, Rooney is to return the stock to Williamson, and Williamson is to pay Rooney a total of $232,150. We find no error of law in the District Court's reasoning in this state-law case, andbelieve no sufficient purpose would be served by an extended opinion. In particular, we believe that the District Court has appropriately exercised its discretion in adjusting the equities between the parties, and in offsetting against plaintiff's recovery the sum of $86,000 which plaintiff received, during his ownership of the stock, as a credit against a loan he took out to buy the stock. See ToddE. Rooney v. George Williamson , No. J-C-95-323, slip op. 6 n.2 (E.D. Ark. January 27, 1998). We also see nothing unreasonable in the District Court's award of attorneys' fees and expenses, which is the subject of the appeal in No. 98-1886. There is one respect, however, in which we believe the judgment should be modified. As we have noted above, the District Court offset plaintiff's recovery by the amount of $86,000. We think this offset should have been taken into account in calculating the amount of prejudgment interest. According to the defendant's reply brief, page 10, the interest reduction, through January 29, 1998, should be $11,154.08. We have no reason to doubt this calculation, but believe the better course is to remand this matter to the District Court for re-computation of the amount of interest owed, taking into account the fact that no interest should be charged on the $86,000 from and after the date on which the plaintiff received a credit on his loan for this amount. Accordingly, the judgment is, in the main, affirmed, and the cause is remanded to the District Court for a further calculation in accordance with this opinion.-3-

It is so ordered. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.