alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Brian Yun SUNG, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-0028

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 01, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Appellant's notice of voluntary dismissal is denied without prejudice to file an unconditional notice of voluntary dismissal. See Hammerl v. State, 779 So.2d 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Luis Gerardo LOPEZ-JORQUERAS, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 03-10696.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 10, 2004.*

Decided May 14, 2004.

Judson Thomas Mihok, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Sean Bruner, Esq., Bruner & Upham, P.C., Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Luis Lopez-Jorqueras appeals his 168-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute and importation of methamphetamine. He contends that the district court erred in denying him a downward adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 for his role in the offense, and thus also denying him the benefit of the base offense level cap set forth in U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(a)(3). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate the district court’s judgment.

The district court accepted the presentence report’s description of the offense conduct and found that Lopez-Jorqueras attempted to drive into the United States in his car, which had almost 59 pounds of methamphetamine in its tires. He had loaned the car to an acquaintance, who had loaded it with what Lopez-Jorqueras thought was 40 pounds of marijuana. After delivering the load and returning to Mexico on foot, he was to be paid $1,000. In light of these facts, the district court clearly erred in finding that Lopez-Jorqueras was not a minor or minimal participant because he transported a large quantity of drugs. His lack of knowledge is inconsistent with the conclusion that he was equal with other participants and was not entitled to a downward adjustment. *Cf. United States v. Rosales-Rodriguez,*289 F.3d 1106, 1112 (9th Cir.) (large quantity of drugs and other facts supported inference that defendant purchased drugs and attempted to import them himself), *cert. denied,*537 U.S. 1061, 123 S.Ct. 643, 154 L.Ed.2d 545 (2002); *United States v.*
      *166
      *Murillo,*255 F.3d 1169, 1179 (9th Cir.2001) (defendant had transported other loads).

VACATED and REMANDED.

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
John E. PUGH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-710

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 13, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Justin F. Karpf, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Daniel Krumbholz, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Lewis, Makar, and Osterhaus, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1



STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

OF PTEK HOLDINGS, INC.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§ 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly
Report of PTEK Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Boland T. Jones, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Boland T. JonesBoland T. JonesChief Executive OfficerPTEK Holdings, Inc.August 9, 2004
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, each of the undersigned hereby certifies in his or her capacity as an officer of Manatron, Inc. (the "Company") that the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the accounting period ended April 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of such period and the results of operations of the Company for such period.

This Certificate is given pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and for no other purpose.

|Date:  July 15, 2005 | /s/ Paul R. Sylvester                                  
|-------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------
|                     | Paul R. Sylvester
President and Chief Executive Officer
|                     |                                                        
|                     |                                                        
|                     |                                                        
|                     | /s/ Krista L. Inosencio                                
|                     | Krista L. Inosencio
Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 11

                           DURA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
               STATEMENTS RE COMPUTATIONS OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                     IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS
                                   (UNAUDITED)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           THREE MONTHS ENDED                     SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                                JUNE 30,                               JUNE 30,
                                                        2000                 1999              2000                1999
                                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                               <C>                  <C>                <C>                 <C>
Net Income per Share - Basic

Net Income                                         $         9,440     $          7,583   $         21,898     $        15,348
                                                  ================     ================   ================    ================

Weighted average number of common shares:
      Common stock                                          44,389               44,085             44,389              44,092
                                                  ================     ================   ================    ================

Net Income per share                               $          0.21     $           0.17   $           0.49     $          0.35
                                                  ================     ================   ================    ================

NET INCOME PER SHARE - DILUTED

Net Income                                         $         9,440     $          7,583   $         21,898     $        15,348
                                                  ================     ================   ================    ================

Weighted average number of common and
  common equivalent shares assuming
  issuance of all dilutive contingent shares:
      Common stock                                          44,389               44,085             44,389              44,092
      Stock options                                            840                  562              1,057                 778
      Warrants                                                 547                  438                556                 458
                                                  ----------------     ----------------   ----------------    ----------------
         Total                                              45,776               45,085             46,002              45,328
                                                  ================     ================   ================    ================

Net Income per share                               $         0.21      $           0.17   $           0.48     $          0.34
                                                  ================     ================   ================    ================
</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1






                                November 13, 1997



American International Petroleum Corporation
444 Madison Avenue, Suite 32023
New York, New York 10022

Huddleston & Co., Inc. consents to the use of its name and its report dated
February 6, 1997, entitled "American International Petroleum Corporation,
Colombia, S.A., Estimated Reserves and Revenues, as of January 1, 1997" by
American International Petroleum Corporation in its Form 10K for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 1996. We also consent to the reference to our firm under the
capition "Experts".

                                               For and On Behalf of

                                               HUDDLESTON & CO., INC.



                                               /s/ Peter D. Huddleston, P.E.
                                                   Peter D. Huddleston, P.E.
                                                   President
Exhibit
      23.01





CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
      have
      issued our report dated April 16, 2007, accompanying the consolidated financial
      statements included in the Annual Report of SAN Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-K
      for
      the year ended December 31, 2006. We hereby consent
      to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements
      of SAN Holdings, Inc. on Form S-1 (File No. 333-137207, effective January 31,
      2007) and Form S-8 (File No. 333-81910, effective January 31,
      2002).




/s/ GRANT
      THORNTON LLP




Denver,
      Colorado


April
      16,
      2007
Lancet INDEMNITY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Dixie KAVAL, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0597

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 23, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Pursuant to the notice of voluntary dismissal filed herein, this appeal is dismissed.
Frank H. SUITS, Sr., Appellant, v. Elizabeth H. SUITS, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5651

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed October 11, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

JERALD W. OVERLY,

Plaintiff, Case No. 3:18-cv-163
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF District Judge Walter H. Rice

SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. #19), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such

objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and

Recommendation.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1.

2.

The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #19) is ADOPTED in full;
The Commissioner’s non-disability determination is REVERSED;

This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner under the Fourth Sentence
of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings; and

This case is terminated on the docket of this Court.

Date: G-2B-1% dew AGN

Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman

WALTER HERBERT RICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION

Terry Clark, 

Petitioner, 

v. Case No. 1:18cv263 

Warden, Warren Correctional Institution, Judge Michael R. Barrett 

Respondent. 

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed 

by the Magistrate Judge on February 1, 2019 (Doc. 17). 

Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C), 

including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file 

objections to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. United States v. 

Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge=s R&R 

(Doc. X) have been filed. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 17) of the Magistrate Judge is 

hereby ADOPTED. Consistent with the recommendation by the Magistrate Judge, the

Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 7) is GRANTED and Petitioner's petition for a 

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 3) is DISMISSED with 

prejudice; and Petitioner's Motions to Amend (Doc. 5) and to Stay Proceedings (Doc. 

14) are DENIED.

 
2

Any request for certificate of appealability or request to certify an appeal would 

not be taken in good faith and would be denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Michael R. Barrett 

Michael R. Barrett, Judge 

United States District Court
Case 1:01-cv-00116-SSB-TSH Document 123 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:01-cv-00116-SSB-TSH Document 123 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:01-cv-00116-SSB-TSH Document 123 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:01-cv-00116-SSB-TSH Document 123 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:01-cv-00116-SSB-TSH Document 123 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:01-cv-00116-SSB-TSH Document 123 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:01-cv-00116-SSB-TSH Document 123 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:01-cv-00116-SSB-TSH Document 123 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 8 of 8
<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, 2007

                              /S/ JAMES W. DORST
                              ------------------------------
                              JAMES W. DORST
                              CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                              (PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER)
Case: 1:18-cv-00428-MRB-KLL Doc #: 6 Filed: 06/26/18 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 26
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 quarterly
report of Gibraltar Packaging Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, being the Chief Executive
Officer and the Vice President Finance (chief financial officer), respectively, of the
Company, certify, 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 § 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/   Walter E. Rose        |  | /s/   Brett E. Moller  | 
|--------------------------- |  | ---------------------- | 
|                            |  |                       
|WALTER E. ROSE              |  | BRETT E. MOLLER        | 
|Chairman of the Board       |  | Vice President Finance | 
|and Chief Executive Officer | 

Dated: November 12, 2003

This certification is made solely for
the purpose of 18 U.S.C. § 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained in that
statute, and not for any other purpose.

---
JeffTelander US EPA Mail Code 0243-02 109 TW Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Mr. Telander, March 29, 2011 Enclosedyou will findacopy of the Narrative Stack Testing Report in reference to the Information Collection Request dated March 12, 2010. The ERT isnow in theprocess of being prepared and should be submitted in thenear future. Sincerely, **-,;~** TimSwaw Florim USA 300 International Blvd. Clarksville TN 37040 931-553-7571 cc: Howard Gilberg
Daryl Luke ROWELL v. STATE

CR-15-1169

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### Ursery *v.*Niehuss, Admr.

4-8766

217 S. W. 2d 848

Opinion delivered February 28, 1949.

*754
      *John Hardin Wright*and *L. L. Mitchell,*for appellant.

*J. H. Loohadoo,*for appellee.

Geobge Rose Smith, J.

In 1941 these appellants brought a suit against O. K. Barringer and others to quiet title to the land now in controversy. By agreement the case was set for trial on April 6, 1942. Some of the appellants appeared' at the courthouse on the date for trial and became disturbed by the absence of the attorney then representing them. They were told by the clerk and a bystander that the case would not be tried that day, but neverthless they drove to the city of their attorney’s, residence and conferred with him. He assured them that he was looking after the matter and that the case would not be heard that day.

In fact the case was called for trial. The court dismissed appellants’ complaint for want of prosecution and heard the evidence adduced by Barringer to support his cross-complaint. A decree was entered quieting title in Barringer, on the basis of tax payments for fifteen years upon wild and unimproved lands.

No further action was taken until appellants filed this suit in 1947 against the administrator of Barring-er’s estate. The complaint sets out the appellants’ original claim of ownership and details the circumstances attending the entry of the 1942 decree. The prayer is that the earlier degree be sét aside and that title be *755quieted in appellants. After hearing testimony the chancellor dismissed the complaint. This appeal followed.

We are not certain whether this is intended to be an independent snit or an attempt to vacate the decree for unavoidable casualty pursuant to Ark. Stats. (1947), § 29-506. In either case the trial court’s decree is correct. If we treat the case as a new suit, then the appel-lee’s plea of *res judicata*was properly sustained, there having been a trial on the merits in 1942. *Kinion*v. *Roark,*193 Ark. 321, 99 S. W. 2d 249. And under the statute the complaint is defective in that it is not verified and does not state a meritorious defense to Barringer’s cross-complaint. Nor did the proof below establish unavoidable casualty, as it was not shown that the failure of appellants’ former attorney to attend the trial was occasioned by an excusable cause. If his absence were due merely to neglect, of course the appellants would be bound by the consequences of his carelessness. *Blackstad Merc. Co.*v. *Bond,*104 Ark. 45, 148 S. W. 262. Consequently the burden of proof was not sustained, no matter how charitably we view the pleadings.

Affirmed.