alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7101

TOMMY R. ROBINSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

HOWARD COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; POLICE CHIEF;

THOMAS M. MARTIN, Detective; RICHARD WITTE,

Detective; KELLY SMITH, Officer; RICHARD

RUTLEDGE, Officer; M. T. HARDING, Officer;

MICHAEL MARTIN, Officer; VICTORIA PLANK, Officer; WILLIAM SEIFERT, Officer; NATHAN RETTIG,

Officer; MICHAEL PRICE, Officer; UNIDENTIFIED

MD STATE TROOPER; V. WILLIAM, Officer,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

NORMAN SNYDER, Detective; K-9, Dino; SUSAN

REIDER, Officer; KEITH FISHER, Officer,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. John R. Hargrove, Senior District Judge.

(CA-94-393-HAR)

Submitted: January 11, 1996 Decided: January 23, 1996

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2
3

Tommy R. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara McFaul Cook, County

Solicitor, Rebecca Ann Laws, COUNTY SOLICITOR'S OFFICE, Ellicott

City, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's denial of his motion

for court-appointed counsel. We dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may

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

(1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.

§ 1292 (1988); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is

neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral

order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>
               
<ARTICLE>               5
                                
<S>                                        <C>  
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                           MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      11,637
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                            1,147,947
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         1,372,281
<PP&E>                                  48,091,822
<DEPRECIATION>                          25,450,877
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          24,253,781
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    2,131,967
<BONDS>                                  3,740,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                    45,174
<OTHER-SE>                              15,460,621
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            24,253,781
<SALES>                                  2,167,572
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         2,247,311
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              733,205
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            23,953
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         113,105
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             94,484
<INCOME-TAX>                                18,523
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         75,961
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                75,961
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .02
        
                            

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.1

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

I, C. Christian Winkle, President and Chief Executive Officer of Mariner Health
Care, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. section 1350, that:



|(1) |  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2002 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of sections 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 14, 2002

|                                                                                                                
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ C. Christian Winkle

C. Christian Winkle
President and
Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer)
#### Johnson *v.*Foster.

Opinion delivered November 2, 1901.

Jurisdiction — Nonresident Defendant — Garnishment.—By publication of a warning order against a nonresident defendant and service of a writ of garnishment' upon a resident who was indebted to defendant, tbe court acquired jurisdiction to ascertain tbe amount due from defendant to plaintiff, and to adjudge that tbe money due from tbe garnishee to defendant should be applied toward tbe satisfaction of plaintiff’s claim.

Appeal from Boone Circuit Court.

E. *G.*Mitchell, Judge,

STATEMENT BY THE COURT.

Appellants filed in the Boone circuit court their complaint against appellee James A. Foster, defendant below, to recover $260 *618for breach of contract, and at the same time filed affidavit, bond, and. interrogatories for garnishment against appellee 0. L. Scott, and caused a writ of garnishment to be issued and personally served upon him. The defendant, Foster, was duly summoned by warning order, and an attorney was appointed to represent him.

At the January term,'1900, the trial court of its own motion, and-over the objection of appellants, dismissed appellants’ complaint and cause of action, both as to the defendant below, appellee Foster, and as to the garnishee, appellee Scott, for want of jurisdiction.

*G. J. Grump*and *J. W. Story,*for appellants.

The record shows the presence of every required jurisdictional • fact. 66 Ark. 582; 4 Ark. 198; 48 S. W. 1060; 19 Ark. 334; 13 S. W. 978; 45 S. W. 770; 175 U. S. 396; Waples, Att. & Garn. 594, 595. Garnishment is in the nature of a proceeding *in*rem. 4 Ark. 198; 19 Ark. 334; 66 Ark. 582; Drake, Att. § 452.

Wood, J.,

(after stating the facts). The court erred.

Appellants had met every requirement of jurisdiction under the act of April 19, 1895. Service of the writ creates a lien in favor of the plaintiff upon the money due from the garnishee to the defendant. *Little Rock Traction & Electric Co.*v. *Wilson,*66 Ark. 586. The proceeding is analogous to that of. the attachment of property of a nonresident defendant. Here the *res,*so to speak, is the money due from the garnishee to the defendant. Service of the writ seizes that in the hands of the garnishee, and holds it subject to the payment of the claim of the plaintiff against the defendant, to the extent only that it may go, and, after constructive service upon the defendant and personal service of the writ, the court may proceed to- ascertain the amount due from the defendant to the plaintiff and to adjudge that the money due from the garnishee to the defendant shall go *pro tanto,*if necessary, in satisfaction of the plaintiff’s claim. *Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co.*v. *Sturm,*174 U. S. 710, and cases cited; *King*v. *Cross,*175 U. S. 396; *Berry*v. *Davis,*13 S. W. 978; *Spalding*v. *Wayne,*45 S. W. 770. See also *Kansas City, P. & G. R. Co.*v. *Parser, ante,*p. 401.

Of course, personal judgment can not be rendered against the defendant, and the bond fully protects-him.

Reversed, with directions to reinstate the cause.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN Distnct of OHIO 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. 

WARRANT FOR ARREST 

TODD BLAKE OLIVER Case Number: 190-CR-00093 

To: The United States Marshal 

and any Authorized United States Officer 

YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to arrest TODD BLAKE OLIVER 

Name 

and bring him or her fonhwith to the nearest magistrate judge to answer a(n) 

Indictment 0 Information Complaint 0 Order of court C3 Violatioli Probation ViolationPetition 

charging him or hcr (bric~dcscription of offense) fc 0 

ti- 

(2, 

-s 

u 

VIOLATIONS OF CONUI'l'lONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE (SEE ATTACHED PETITION) .kJ 

-n "... ? 

-,. 

. , - . 

United States Code, Section(s) ,g- in violation of ,m - 

- JAMES BO- CLERK 

Naln~ of Issuing Oflicer rirlcofls.iuing Oflicer 

Gm#Ek--- September 18,2006, Cincinnati, Ohio 

Signature ol Issuing Oflicer Ilatr and l.ocatton 

Bail tixed at $ by 

Name orludiclrl ORiacr 

RETURN 

Th~s warrant was received and executed with the arrest of the above-named defendant 

- ,fT id0 f- FDW cidcdm , by 4.Sod 

Case 1:00-cr-00093-SAS Document 55 Filed 09/22/2006 Page 1 of 1
James C. COLE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4732

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mandamus is denied.
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

In connection with the Annual Report of Universal Health Realty Income Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alan B. Miller, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Trust, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(i) the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Trust at the end of, and for the period covered by the Report.



/s/ Alan B. MillerPresident and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 14, 2006


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








In connection with the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of China Sky One Medical, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended
December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), I, Liu Yan-qing, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to 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 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:  March
16, 2010




By:
                        /s/
      Liu Yan-qingName:  Liu
      Yan-qingTitle:  Chairman,
      Chief Executive Officer and President(Principal
      Executive Officer)
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.2


CERTIFICATION

I, James W Dorst, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of Aethlon Medical, 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 officers 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 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 officers 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 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.

Date: February 13, 2006

                              /S/ JAMES W. DORST
                              ------------------------------
                              JAMES W. DORST
                              CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                              (PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER)



                                       20
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1956
IN RE: MONICA LYNN COLEMAN; COLEMAN CRATEN, L.L.C., Debtors,

--------------------------------------------- MONICA LYNN COLEMAN, Debtor - Appellant, versus LORI S. SIMPSON, Chapter 7 Trustee, Trustee - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-3453-BEL; BK-99-56381; BK-99-56239; AP-99-5665) Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 4, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Monica Lynn Coleman, Appellant Pro se. Kevin Gerald Hroblak, WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Monica Lynn Coleman appeals the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying her motion to reconsider its prior order denying her motion to replace the Chapter 7 trustee. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Coleman v. Simpson , No. CA-04-3453-BEL, BK-99- 56381, BK-99-56239, AP-99-5665 (D. Md. July 14, 2005). 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.

AFFIRMED
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 1 of 20 PAGEID #: 242
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 2 of 20 PAGEID #: 243
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 3 of 20 PAGEID #: 244
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 4 of 20 PAGEID #: 245
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 5 of 20 PAGEID #: 246
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 6 of 20 PAGEID #: 247
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 7 of 20 PAGEID #: 248
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 8 of 20 PAGEID #: 249
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 9 of 20 PAGEID #: 250
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 10 of 20 PAGEID #: 251
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 11 of 20 PAGEID #: 252
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 12 of 20 PAGEID #: 253
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 13 of 20 PAGEID #: 254
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 14 of 20 PAGEID #: 255
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 15 of 20 PAGEID #: 256
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 16 of 20 PAGEID #: 257
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 17 of 20 PAGEID #: 258
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 18 of 20 PAGEID #: 259
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 19 of 20 PAGEID #: 260
Case: 1:18-cv-00166-SJD Doc #: 23 Filed: 03/15/18 Page: 20 of 20 PAGEID #: 261
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

TERI A. HAMPTON,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF 

TREASURY, et al.,

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 Case No. 1:18-cv-304

 Judge Timothy S. Black

 Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman

DECISION AND ENTRY 

ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 24) AND

TERMINATING THIS CASE IN THIS COURT

This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference to United 

States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the 

Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on May 9, 2019, 

submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 24). No objections were filed.

 As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has 

reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo 

all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does 

determine that the Report and Recommendation should be and is hereby ADOPTED in 

its entirety. 

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above:

1) Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 13) is GRANTED and this case is hereby 

dismissed;
2

2) The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly, whereupon this case is 

TERMINATED from the docket of this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 6/3/19 s/ Timothy S. Black

Timothy S. Black

United States District Judge
A.P., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-651

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Rodney THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3730

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed February 20, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
| 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. |

| /s/Phillip      G. Creek                                  |   | Date:  February      25, 2009 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------|
| Phillip      G. Creek                                     |   |                                    |
| Executive      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |                                    |
|                                                      |   |                                    |
Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

1650 Arch Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

January 28, 2013

The Honorable Randy C. Huffman

Cabinet Secretary, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection

601 57th Street SE

Charleston, West Virginia 25304

Dear Secretary Huffman:

On December 13, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a 

revision to the West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP revision was submitted 

to address required infrastructure elements of Section 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2010 1- hour nitrogen dioxide 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in West Virginia. EPA has determined that 

the submittal is complete for these elements. 

If members of your staff have any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Jacqueline 

Lewis, Office of Air Program Planning, at (215) 814-2037. 

Sincerely, 

/s/

 Diana Esher, Director

 Air Protection Division 

cc: John A. Benedict, Director, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection