alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# ORIGINAL 3Jn tbe Wniteb**~tates ~ourt**  

# ofjf 

# eberal**~laims**

* * * * * * * *



### BILLY DRIVER,

v
. No. 15-607C (Filed September 28, 2015) NOT FOR PUBLICATION

* * * * * * * * * * * * * Plaintiff, * * * * 

### THE UNITED STATES, * * Defendant. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



### ORDER 

# FILED SEP 2 8

.2015
U.S. COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

Billy Driver is aproseplaintiff, having filed a complaint against the United States on June 16, 2015. Plaintiffseeks compensation for his alleged unjust conviction and continuing imprisonment in the California state prison system. Mister Driver also seeks social security benefits and requests damages for torts committed by prison guards, such as withholding meals from him.
Defendant moved to dismiss this case for lack ofjurisdiction on August 12, 2015. In support ofits motion, the government argues that this court does not have jurisdiction over plaintiffs claims for unjust conviction. Mot. at 4. In order for this court to havejurisdiction, plaintiffmust have a valid certificate ofinnocence. Grayson v. United States, 141 Ct. Cl. 866, 869 (1958). Id. Defendant notes that plaintiffhas not submitted a valid certificate ofinnocence. Id. The government also argues that this court lacksjurisdiction over claims for social security benefits, Marcus v. United States, 909 F.2d 1470, 1471 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and tort claims against the government, Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621, 623 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Id. at 6-7.
Pursuant to the Rules ofthe United States Court ofFederal Claims (RCFC), plaintiffis required to respond to a motion seeking dismissal under RCFC 12(b) within 28 days ofservice. RCFC 7.2(b)(l). Plaintiffs response to the government's motion to dismiss was due on or by September 14, 2015. Plaintiffhas not filed aresponse. The failure to timely respond to a motion to dismiss a case, byitself, warrants dismissal ofthe case for failure to prosecute and to comply with these rules. 

### See RCFC 4l(b). Takinginto considerationplaintiffs

### pro se status, however, the Court has examined the complaint. Nothingin this pleading alleges a cause ofaction over which this court hasjurisdiction. The documents that plaintiffhas submitted with his complaint do not remotely resemble the certificate ofinnocence required by 28 U.S.C. § 2513. Nor, for that matter, has plaintiffeven alleged that he was convicted ofa crime against the 

### United States, which is necessary to bring a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1495. To the contrary, plaintiffremains incarcerated in a 

### state penitentiary, apparently for violations of

### state criminallaws. The government is correct that our court lacksjurisdiction over claims for social securitybenefits and torts actions against the government. 

### See Marcus, 909 F.2d at 1471; 

### Brown, 105 F.3d at 623; 28 U.S.C. 1491(a)(l) (limitingjurisdiction to "cases not sounding in tort"). Thus, defendant's motion to dismiss this case, for lack ofsubject-matter jurisdiction, is 

### GRANTED. The Clerk shall close the case.



### IT IS SO ORDERED.

# ~~;i£ Ju ge

- 2 -
|                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                        
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                          
|View History: Annual                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                    
|View History:                                                           
|                                                                        
|Washington Natural Gas Percentage Total Industrial Deliveries  (Percent)
|                                                                        
|                                                                        
|Washington Natural Gas Percentage Total Industrial Deliveries  (Percent)
|                                                                        

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        | 1.16   | 1.32   | 1.28   | 1.29   | 1.31   | 1.60   | 1.54  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 1.03   | 1.02   | 0.90   | 0.92   | 0.94   | 1.01   | 1.09   | 1.11   | 1.14   | 1.16  
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1.04   | 1.09   | 1.08   | 1.09   | 1.04   | 1.02   | 1.03   | 1.02   | 0.92   | 0.93  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0.95   | 0.96   | 0.94   |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
#### Tony DOUSE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-1762

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[October 4, 2017]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Charles Burton, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2014-CF-012651-AXXX-MB.

Affirmed.
Exhibit
(32.1)





CERTIFICATION
OF THE 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 officer hereby
certifies as to the Report on Form 10-Q of Met-Pro Corporation for the fiscal
quarter ended April 30, 2009, that (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 results of operations of Met-Pro
Corporation.











Dated:  June
      3, 2009
            
            /s/
      Raymond J. De HontRaymond
      J. De HontChairman,
      Chief Executive Officer and
President
**Exhibit 33.1**

**WAMU ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORP.**

**SERVICER’S REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. (the “Asserting Party”) is responsible for assessing compliance as of December 31, 2006 and for the period fromJanuary 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006 (the “Reporting Period”) of the Platform Transactions (as defined below) with the servicing criterion set forth in Item 1122(d)(3)(i)(C) of Regulation AB (12 CFR part 229.1122(d)(3)(i)(C)) (the“Applicable Servicing Criterion”) and no others**.**  The transactions covered by this Servicer’s Assessment are those securitizations of pools of mortgage loans that were completed on or after January 1, 2006 and prior to January 1,2007 for which the Asserting Party performed servicing functions set forth in Item 1122(d) and that included one or more classes of publicly offered securities registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Platform Transactions”).

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criterion for the Reporting Period, using the Applicable Servicing Criterion, and hasconcluded that it has complied in all material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criterion with respect to the Mortgage Loans. 

Deloitte & Touche LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the Asserting Party’s assessment of compliance with theApplicable Servicing Criterion for the Reporting Period.

Date:  February 22, 2007

  /s/ Thomas G. LehmannName:  Thomas G. LehmannTitle:    President
|                                                                      
|----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                        
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                        
|View History:                                                         
|                                                                      
|Connecticut Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                      
|                                                                      
|Connecticut Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel Consumption  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                      

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0     
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 2      | 12     | 32     | 79     | 87     | 109   
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 118    | 147    | 150    | 183    | 206    | 98     | 81     | 89     | 81     | 49    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 41     | 27     | 27     | 46     | 19     | 15     | 19     | 215    | 218    | 205   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 211    | 200    | 225    | 184    |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 71 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 71

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
 limiting the number of terms that a Member of Congress may serve to 3 
          in the House of Representatives and 2 in the Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 7, 2011

 Mr. Schweikert (for himself, Mr. Walsh of Illinois, and Mr. Duncan of 
 South Carolina) introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
 limiting the number of terms that a Member of Congress may serve to 3 
          in the House of Representatives and 2 in the Senate.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. No person who has served three terms as a 
Representative shall be eligible for election to the House of 
Representatives. For purposes of this section, the election of a person 
to fill a vacancy in the House of Representatives shall be included as 
one term in determining the number of terms that such person has served 
as a Representative if the person fills the vacancy for more than one 
year.
    ``Section 2. No person who has served two terms as a Senator shall 
be eligible for election or appointment to the Senate. For purposes of 
this section, the election or appointment of a person to fill a vacancy 
in the Senate shall be included as one term in determining the number 
of terms that such person has served as a Senator if the person fills 
the vacancy for more than three years.
    ``Section 3. No term beginning before the date of the ratification 
of this article shall be taken into account in determining eligibility 
for election or appointment under this article.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31


[IMPAC LOGGO]                                          IMPAC FUNDING CORPORATION
                                        19500 JAMBOREE ROAD o IRVINE, CA o 92612
                                         WWW.IMPACCOMPANIES.COM o 1.800.597.4101

            CERTIFICATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE MASTER SERVICER WITH

                                    FORM 10-K

      Re: Impac Secured Assets Corp.,
          Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-1

I, Mario Fegan, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D
required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form
10-K of Impac Secured Assets Corp. Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2006-1 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

      2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by
this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

      4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in
preparing the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item
1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic
reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing
agreements; and Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements
required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled
their obligations under the servicing agreements; and

      5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment
of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be
included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and
Exchange Act Rules 13a-l8 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of
noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on
Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties, Countrywide Home Loans,
Inc., GMAC Mortgage, LLC, Midland Loan Services, Inc., Deutsche Bank National
Trust Company.

                                                      Date: 3/22/07


                                                      /s/ Mario Fegan
                                                      --------------------------
                                                      Mario Fegan
                                                      V.P., Master Servicing
#### Z.M., a Child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1082

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed October 10, 2017

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Gail A. Adams, Judge.

AFFIRMED.
### MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 10

- 00916

- CR

Gabriel VERA

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2010CR6747

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr , Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 2, 2011.

DISMISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion is signed by both

Appellant and his attorney. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a). We, therefore, grant the motion and

dismiss this appeal. See id.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish
No. 12-6447.

#### Franklin *v.*Scribner, Warden, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(a) OR RULE 15d-14(a) OF THE**

**SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

 

I, George C. Moore, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Maytag Corporation; 

 

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, inlight 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 financialcondition, 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 ActRules 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 consolidatedsubsidiaries, 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 theeffectiveness 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 mostrecent 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

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: April 22, 2004
|                                                                                                           
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                             
|View History: Annual                                                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                                       
|View History:                                                                                              
|                                                                                                           
|Georgia Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Commercial Sectors by Marketers (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                           
|                                                                                                           
|Georgia Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Commercial Sectors by Marketers (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 14.37  |        |        |       
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 11.00  | 10.53  | 9.69   | 9.19   | 9.71   | 8.28   | 7.61   | 8.46   | 7.68   | 7.70  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 7.20   | 8.05   | 10.87  |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024