alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed January 25 , 2013

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 01135

- CV

____________ IN RE AMERICAN NATIO NAL COUNTY MUTUAL IN SURANCE COMPANY AND AMERICAN NATIONAL LLOYDS INSU RANCE COMPANY , Relator

On Appeal from the 212th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 11CV0882 and 11CV0882

- A



### ORDER

On December 18, 2012 , relator s filed a petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221. Relator s ask this Court to order The Honorable
Susan Criss , Judge of the 212th District Court of Galveston County, Texas, to set
aside her order dated December 5, 2012, e ntered in trial court cause number
11CV0882
, 1 styled Jennifer Avery, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Brittiany Yu chnewicz v. Jonathan Hammond, Larry Hammond, and Terrie

1 After the plea to the jurisdiction was denied, the trial court entered an order of severance.2

Hammond . Relator s assert that the trial court abused its discretion in denying their plea to the jurisdiction

. On January 24, 2013, relators filed in this court an emergency motion for stay of the p roceedings in the trial court

. It appears from the facts stated in the petition and mot i on to stay that
relator s ’ request for relief requires further consideration and that relator s will be prejudiced unless immediate temporary relief is granted. See Tex. R. App. p. 52.8(b), 52.10.
We therefore ORDER that the proceedings of the court below be stayed only as to the claims against American National County Mutual Insurance Company and American National Lloyds Insurance Company in trial court cause
numb er s 11CV0882 and 11CV0882

- A , styled Jennifer Avery, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Brittiany Yuchnewicz v. Jonathan Hammond, Larry Hammond, and Terrie Hammond

. The proceedings as they relate to s uch claims are stayed until final deci sion by this Court of relator s ' petition for writ of mandamus, or until further orders of this Court.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Frost, Christopher, and Jamison.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 610 

To provide for the rescheduling of marijuana into schedule III of the 

Controlled Substances Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 27, 2023 

Mr. STEUBE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 

the Judiciary, 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 provide for the rescheduling of marijuana into schedule 

III of the Controlled Substances Act. 

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 ‘‘Marijuana 1-to-3 Act 

5 of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. RESCHEDULING OF MARIJUANA. 

7 Notwithstanding section 201 and subsections (a) and 

8 (b) of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 

9 U.S.C. 811, 812) respecting the scheduling of controlled 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 610 IH

1 substances, the Attorney General of the United States 

2 shall, by order not later than 60 days after the date of 

3 enactment of this section, transfer marijuana (for pur4 poses of this Act given the same meaning given the term 

5 ‘‘marihuana’’ in section 102 of such Act) from schedule 

6 I of such Act to schedule III of such Act. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
P. 1 

# OAR Box 1846 Prepped byOllie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 42 ) ll-E- 2 Docket Number: 

# A-90-0 7

Printed 11/18/20087:30:16

AM Sheet 42 of 93P. 2 TESTIMON

Y 

### L Environmenta l Protectio n Agnec y Fue l an d Fue l Additiv e Registratio n Publi c Hearing Septembe r 26 , 199 0 Name s o f Testifier s



## *^>^jrw w fompaifl(/Orqanization 

## o o T
4. T^V/.T ^ 

## L ^ L--fe« l 5 

## ,7?X> - CAI/A-ULJ 

## i.M.L.flr\l48tS-lf8r », X X



# -^ V 

# x

'e¥~- 

## Aw W^*vj /

c V 

## ^ 1 Hfr f•fj-rtul . _i.~f7 ' Pr P I

XT***. 

# QL«iJ

1 0 

# n . 1 2 13 . 14 . 1 5 9454 W
Juan A. CRUZ, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-1150

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 28, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
C & J GLOBAL INVESTMENTS, INC., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. CAPGAIN PROPERTIES, INC., et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4274

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 12, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.
#### IN RE: Donald Stuart KOONTZ, Petitioner.

No. 17-1480

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 25, 2017

Decided: May 31, 2017

Donald Stuart Koontz, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before MOTZ, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Donald Stuart Koontz petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court denied Koontz’s motion on April 28, 2017. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Koontz’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pau-peris. 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.

*PETITION DENIED*
EX-10.38






Exhibit 10.38




June 5, 2008




Waypoint
Capital Management

23 Green St. — Suite 210

Huntington, N.Y. 11743




Attention: Mr. Robert Calabretta



Re: Management Agreement Renewals



Dear Mr. Calabretta:



We are writing with respect to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to
which reference is made below (the “Management Agreements”). We are extending the term of the
Management Agreements through June 30, 2009 and all other provisions of the Management Agreements
will remain unchanged.





	 	•	 	CTA CAPITAL LLC
	 
	 	•	 	Citigroup Emerging CTA L.P.




Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning
it to the attention of Ms. Jennifer Magro at the address above or fax to 212-793-1986. If you
have any questions I can be reached at 212-559-5046.



Very truly yours,




	 	 	 	 	 
	CITIGROUP MANAGED FUTURES LLC	 	 
	 
	By:
	 	/s/
Jennifer Magro 	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 
	 

	 	Jennifer Magro	 	 
	 

	 	Chief Financial Officer & Director	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 





	 	 	 	 	 
	WAYPOINT CAPITAL MANAGEMENT	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By: 
	 	/s/ R. Calabretta	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Print Name: R. Calabretta
	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	JM/sr
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: REAPPOINTMENT TO THE

CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION

BOARD 

:

:

:

:

:

NO. 684

SUPREME COURT RULES DOCKET

 O R D E R

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 1

st day of December, 2015, Anthony Charles Aliano, 

Esquire, Dauphin County, is hereby reappointed as a member of the Continuing Legal 

Education Board for a term of three years commencing December 31, 2015.
Zachary Kenneth ALLEN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0584

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 22, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
#### Eddie MURPHY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer Leroy CONRAD, CO II; Officer Dean W. Rounds, Sr., CO II; Officer Shawn Murray, CO II; Officer Kevan Whetstone, CO II; Colin Ottey, M.D.; Jennifer Giles, R.N. at WCI, Defendants-Appellees, *148Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Party-in-Interest-Appellee.

No. 17-6515

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 20, 2017

Decided: June 23, 2017

Eddie Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, Do-rianne Avery Meloy, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, Christopher Michael Balaban, Joseph Barry Chazen, Gina Marie Smith, MEYERS, RODBELL & ROSENBAUM, PA, Riverdale, Maryland, for Appellees.

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Eddie Murphy seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Officer Leroy Conrad, CO II; Officer Dean W. Rounds, Sr., CO II; Officer Shawn Murray, CO II; and Officer Kevan Whetstone, CO II; the action remains pending as to two other Defendants. 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 order Murphy seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. *See Porter v. Zook,*803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, 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*
#### Stephen Evans-Freke, Appellant, v Showcase Contracting Corp. et al., Respondents.

[770 NYS2d 640]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of a home improvement contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated March 17, 2003, as denied his motion to preliminarily enjoin the defendants from filing a notice of mechanic’s lien.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

To obtain the drastic remedy of a preliminary injunction, a movant must demonstrate (1) a likelihood of success on the merits, (2) irreparable harm if the injunction is denied, and (3) a balance of the equities in favor of granting the injunction *(see Matter of Merscorp, Inc. v Romaine,*295 AD2d 431, 432 [2002]; *Peterson v Corbin,*275 AD2d 35, 37 [2000]; *Laro Maintenance Corp. v Culkin,*255 AD2d 560 [1998]). Here, the plaintiff failed to establish a clear right to relief under the foregoing standard. Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied his motion for a preliminary injunction. Santucci, J.P., Schmidt, Adams and Crane, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**Certifications**
I, Michael W. Patrick, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of CarmikeCinemas, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
  a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;   b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and   c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol 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 financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors:
  a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and   b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
December 13, 2004 /s/ Michael W. PatrickMichael W. PatrickPresident, Chief Executive Officer andChairman of the Board of Directors
Michael F. DALY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-1651

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
|   | · | Directors are granted stock options, with new directors receiving an initial grant of 50,000 options and continuing directors receiving an “evergreen” option grant of 16,667 options.  At the annual meeting in October 2009, shareholders approved a one-time increase of the evergreen option grant to 30,000 options. |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | · | Through 2008, directors did not receive cash compensation for their services.  However, at the annual meeting in December 2008, shareholders approved the payment of cash compensation, in addition to the stated options compensation, according to the following: |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 1. | NIS 31,700 base annually per director, as linked to the applicable Israeli consumer price index, payable in four equal installments at the beginning of each calendar quarter; and |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | NIS 1,590 per director per face to face Board or committee meeting or NIS954 (60% of NIS 1590) in case of telephonic participation at such meeting, payable at the beginning of each calendar quarter following the quarter during which a Board member participated in a meeting. No separate per meeting compensation will be paid for committee meetings that are held on the same day immediately prior or subsequent to a Board meeting.  In that event, a Board and committee meeting will be considered one meeting. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 3. | For non-Israeli based directors, the amounts set forth will be paid in United States dollars, according to the representative rate of exchange published by the Bank of Israel on the date of payment. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 131147 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 131147 

 COA: 264658 
 Wayne CC: 85-003281-01

JOSEPH HENRY SIMPSON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 23, 2006 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

d1023 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 31, 2006 

 Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE BISYS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES FOR
THE SIX MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          96,218
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   64,590
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,845
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               171,279
<PP&E>                                          66,978
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,581
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 295,556
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           76,152
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           525
<OTHER-SE>                                     205,458
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   295,556
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               182,893
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  107,889
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,259
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   656
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 153
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,440
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,803
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             11,637
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,637
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.43
        

</TABLE>
Ladron PORTER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4122

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 26, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Eddie James MURPHY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-0093

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 20, 2018

Eddie James Murphy, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Amanda D. Stokes, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Due to Appellant's apparent abuse of the legal process by his repeated pro se filings attacking his judgment and sentence, the Court issued an order directing Appellant to show cause why he should not be prohibited from future pro se filings. *See**State v. Spencer* , 751 So.2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999) (requiring that courts "first provide notice and an opportunity to respond before preventing [a] litigant from bringing further attacks on his or her conviction and sentence"). Appellant's response to the show cause order does not provide a legal basis to prohibit the imposition of sanctions.

Because Appellant's continued and repeated attacks on his judgment and sentence have become an abuse of the legal process, we hold that he is barred from future pro se filings in this Court concerning Columbia County Circuit Court case *1208number 1997-715-CF. The Clerk of the Court is directed not to accept any future filings concerning this case unless they are filed by a member in good standing with The Florida Bar. Appellant is warned that any filings that violate the terms of this opinion may result in a referral to the appropriate institution for disciplinary procedures as provided in section 944.279, Florida Statutes. *See* Fla. R. App. P. 9.410.

Rowe, Ray, and Makar, JJ., concur.
Dillon CALISI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1274

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned, Gerald E. Bisbee, Jr. the Chief Executive Officer of ReGen Biologics, Inc.
(the Company), has executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities
and Exchange Commission of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ending March 31, 2005 (the Report). The undersigned hereby certifies 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. Date: May 13, 2005
    
    /s/ Gerald E. Bisbee, JrName: Gerald E. Bisbee, JrTitle: Chief Executive Officer