alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Philip J. Hickey, Appellant, v Glenn S. Goord, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[770 NYS2d 904]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Benza, J.), entered September 9, 2002 in Albany County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, granted respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating prison disciplinary rules by failing to comply with urinalysis testing procedures and refusing a direct order. Supreme Court dismissed the proceeding for lack of personal jurisdiction over respondent given petitioner’s admission that he failed to serve respondent with the petition and supporting papers as directed in the order to show cause. We affirm. “Failure of an inmate to satisfy the service requirements set forth in an order to show cause requires dismissal for lack of jurisdiction absent a showing that imprisonment presented obstacles beyond his [or her] control which prevented compliance” *(Matter of Gittens v Selsky,*193 AD2d 986, 987 [1993] [citations omitted]; *see Matter of Townes v Selsky,*309 AD2d 1106 [2003]). No such showing has been *803made by petitioner, notwithstanding his assertion that he had insufficient funds for photocopying *(see Matter of McCants v Travis,*282 AD2d 851 [2001], *lv denied*97 NY2d 605 [2001]).

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
NATIONAL AUTO PROPERTIES, INC., a Florida corporation; Carol J. Levin, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Leonard D. Levin, deceased; Durant Holdings, LLC ; and Bedford Investments, LLC, Appellants, v. F/R 550, LLC, a Florida limited liability company and F/R 3329, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, Appellees.

Case No. 2D16-5638

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 31, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 24, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1000
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                            DEC-29-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                                 MAR-24-1998
<CASH>                                                           136,679
<SECURITIES>                                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                          0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                                       11,143
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 160,185
<PP&E>                                                           443,307
<DEPRECIATION>                                                         0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   632,148
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             41,420
<BONDS>                                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<COMMON>                                                             412
<OTHER-SE>                                                             0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     632,148
<SALES>                                                          153,514
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 153,514
<CGS>                                                             57,215
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                     69,524
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                   6,980
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                 1,538
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                   22,871
<INCOME-TAX>                                                       8,077
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                    0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                      14,711
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                       0.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0.35
        

</TABLE>
#### Gordon MCCAIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Collette PETERS, Director O.D.O.C.; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-35231

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*535Submitted February 14, 2017 *

Filed February 23, 2017

Gordon McCain, Pro Se

Dustin B'uehler, Denise Gale Fjordbeck, Assistant Attorney General, Oregon Department of Justice, Salem, OR, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Gordon McCain, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging medical deliberate indifference and equal protection claims arising from the prison’s refusal to provide him testosterone injections. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Albino v. Baca,*747 F.3d 1162, 1168 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc). We vacate and remand.

The district court correctly observed that McCain had not pursued his grievances beyond the first level. However, the district court did not expressly consider McCain’s evidence that he was not provided with instructions on how to file an appeal, that he did not have access to the necessary forms, or that he had been informed by a prison official that he could not appeal his grievances. *See Sapp v. Kimbrell,*623 F.3d 813, 823 (9th Cir. 2010) (explaining that the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) does not require exhaustion when circumstances render administrative remedies “effectively unavailable”); *Marella v. Terhune,*568 F.3d 1024, 1027 (9th Cir. 2009) (administrative remedies may be effectively unavailable where the prisoner lacks the necessary forms or is reliably informed that he cannot file a grievance). Moreover, McCain’s failure to include a particular legal theory or failure to identify each named defendant in his grievances is not a valid basis for concluding that he did not exhaust administrative remedies. *See Reyes v. Smith,*810 F.3d 654, 658-69 (9th Cir. 2016) (under the PLRA, a grievance need not include legal terminology, legal theories, or provide personal notice to a particular official that he may be sued). Accordingly, we vacate and remand for further proceedings.

Appellees shall bear the costs on appeal.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #17332 and #17333; Virginia Disaster Number VA-00096]
 AGENCY: Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the Commonwealth of Virginia dated 02/02/2022. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:*
                         08/30/2021 through 08/31/2021.
 DATES: Issued on 02/02/2022. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         04/04/2022. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         11/02/2022.
 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: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:*
                     Buchanan *Contiguous Counties:* Virginia: Dickenson, Russell, Tazewell West Virginia: McDowell, Mingo Kentucky: Pike The Interest Rates are: Percent*For Physical Damage:*Homeowners with Credit Available Elsewhere
3.125Homeowners without Credit Available Elsewhere
1.563Businesses with Credit Available Elsewhere
5.710Businesses without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.855Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere
2.000Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.000*For Economic Injury:*Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.855Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.000
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 17332 6 and for economic injury is 17333 0. The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are Kentucky, Virginia, West Virginia. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Isabella Guzman, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2022-02533 Filed 2-7-22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8026-03-P
Exhibit 32.1




Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. 1350






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 Arrayit Corporation(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Rene A. Schena 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 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/  Rene A. Schena


Rene A. Schena


Chief Executive Officer




April 14, 2014
PARKWOOD POOLS, INC., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Rebecca OCARIZ and Humberto Ocariz, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-2037

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

SEPTEMBER 28, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Protocol
Systems, Inc. Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1998 and
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the nine months ended
September 30, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           6,458
<SECURITIES>                                    14,015
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,555<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                       418
<INVENTORY>                                     13,160
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                47,330
<PP&E>                                          14,058
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,090
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  58,134
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,952
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            83
<OTHER-SE>                                      49,686
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    58,134
<SALES>                                         49,410
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                49,410
<CGS>                                           24,052
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,052
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                24,920
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0<F2>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    438
<INCOME-TAX>                                        92
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                346
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       346
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04
<FN>
<F1>Net of allowance
<F2>The amount of loss provision is not significant and has been included with
other expenses.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Richard Neal GILLESPIE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0802

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Webster Douglas WILLIAMS, III, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-6794

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: August 17, 2017

Decided: August 22, 2017

Webster Douglas Williams, III, Appellant Pro Se. William E. Day, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina; Stanley D. Ragsdale, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Webster Douglas Williams, III, seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motions for default judgment and to strike the Government’s response to Williams’ 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The orders, Williams seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we deny. Williams’ motions to strike the Government’s response and to correct error and we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

*DISMISSED*
EXHIBIT 23

                            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements 
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-26745, 33-53561 and 33-51021) pertaining to the Premark 
International, Inc. Director Stock Plan and the Premark International, Inc. 
1994 Incentive Plan, and in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-35137) 
of Premark International, Inc. and in the related Prospectus of our report 
dated February 6, 1998, with respect to the consolidated financial statements 
and schedules of Premark International, Inc. included in this Annual report 
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 27, 1997.


ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Chicago, Illinois
March 18, 1998
i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION No. 04-10-00017- CV Rob e rt BOULAY , Appellant

v . INTOWN SUITE S MANAG EMENT, INC. ,

Appellee Fr om the 166th J udicial District Court, Be x ar County , Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-CI -04652 Honora ble Martha T anner , J udg e Presiding PER CU RI AM Sitt ing: Kar en Ang elini , J ustice

Sandee B ry an Mar ion , J ustice Phy lis J . Speedlin , J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: April 28, 2010 DI SMI SSED The pa rties have filed an Ag ree d J oint Motion to D ismiss Appea l, a sking us to dismi ss the appea l and orde r costs on appe al taxed ag ainst the parties who incurr ed them. We g rant the motion and dismiss the appea l. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(a) (2). Costs on appea l a re ta x ed ag ainst the parties who incurr ed them. See id . 42.1(d). PER CU RI AM
Exhibit 32.1 

 

**CERTIFICATION**

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

**AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Thomas E. Mara, as Chief Executive Officer of The FINOVA Group Inc. (the“Company”) certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

 

(1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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 11, 2005
#### Anthony C. MCKAY, Claimant-Appellant v. Robert A. MCDONALD, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee

2016-1351

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

December 9, 2016

Kenneth M. Carpentek, Law Offices of Carpenter Chartered, Topeka, KS, for claimant-appellant.

Agatha Koprowski, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent-appellee. Also represented by Benjamin C. Mizer, Robert E. Kirsch-man, Jr., Scott D. Austin; Jonathan Krisch, Brian D. Griffin, Office of General Counsel, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.

(Prost, Chief Judge, Newman and Lourie, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
Path K. CLARK and Shawn K. Clark, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D16-0714

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 30, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
| 1.   | The Annual Report on Amendment No. 1 to the Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); 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 3, 2011                                      |
|--------|------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Signature: | /s/ Terry Lee                                         |
|   | Title:     | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000883476
<NAME> CRESCENT BANKING COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           3,918
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             122
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                67,311
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     10,914
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          13,382
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            14,957
<LOANS>                                         64,309
<ALLOWANCE>                                        947
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 168,129
<DEPOSITS>                                     115,117
<SHORT-TERM>                                    28,745
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,593
<LONG-TERM>                                      4,050
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,764
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,858
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 168,129
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,520
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  257
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    58
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,278
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,118
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,667
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,611
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       95
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,514
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (194,341)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   (124,376)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (124,376)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    9.22
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                       219
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,108
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   865
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       13
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  865
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               885
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             62


</TABLE>
Arthur H. MELTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-1878

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 19, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*