alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-2622
JOHN R. MCINTYRE; RUTH E. MCINTYRE, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; CHAIRMAN, LOUDOUN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (George Burton); CIRCUIT COURT OF VIRGINIA FOR LOUDOUN COUNTY (Judge J. H. Chamblin); RICHARD KIRK, Clerk of the Court, Circuit Court of Virginia for Loudoun County;SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA; F&M BANKWINCHESTER, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-95-764-A) Submitted: November 30, 1995 Decided: January 29, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John R. McIntyre, Ruth E. McIntyre, Appellants Pro Se. Rita Marie Sampson, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; John Thomas Burch, Jr., MALONEY & BURCH, Washington, D.C.; Henry Edmunds Coleman, III, BRYAN & COLEMAN, P.L.C., Winchester, Virginia, for Appellees.23 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal from the district court's order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the motion to dismiss the appeal, and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. McIntyre v. Attorney Gen. , No. CA-95-764-A (E.D. Va. August 11, 1995). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. We deny the motions of Appellees Kirk and the Chairman of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors to dismiss them as parties.

AFFIRMED
#### Michael James Drake STEWART, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

CASE NO. 1D17-4334

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed December 7, 2017

Rehearing Denied January 17, 2018

Michael James Draké Stewart, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed as unauthorized. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004).

WETHERELL, RAY, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR;
Exhibit 31.3


ASCENT SOLAR TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Victor Lee, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ascent Solar Technologies, 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; and


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.





May 1, 2017/s/ VICTOR LEEPresident and Chief Executive Officer and a Director(principal executive officer and principal financial and accounting officer)
---

Exhibit
32.2





Certification of Chief Financial
Officer


Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002








Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
officer of MAXXAM Inc., a Delaware corporation (the ACompany@), does
hereby certify that:





(a)           the
accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008
of the Company (the AReport@) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and





(b)           the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.











Date:           August
8,
2008                                                                                               
                                                                                    
  /S/    M.
EMILY MADISON


M. Emily Madison


Chief Financial Officer








The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63
of Title 18, United States Code).





---
#### STATE EX REL. John CUNNINGHAM v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2016-KH-1571

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

01/09/2018

ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, ! PARISH OF ORLEANS

PER CURIAM:

l iDenied. Relator fails to show that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel during plea negotiations under the standard of *Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, see 28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr,P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set-out in La.C.Cr.P, art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator’s claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing:the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state col*545lateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
No. 12-6466.

#### Gleason *v.*California.

Sup. Ct. Cal. Certio-rari denied.
f10q01124iv_scivantamedic.htm


EXHIBIT 4.4


 


Second Addendum to the 8% Convertible Debenture


 


between


  








 


and


 


Scivanta Medical Corporation







This Second Addendum (this “Second Addendum”) to the 8% Convertible Debenture (as such term is defined below), entered into as of the 31st day of January, 2012 (the “Second Addendum Effective Date”), is by and between _________________ (the “Holder”) and Scivanta Medical Corporation (the “Company”).  Capitalized terms used herein, but not otherwise defined herein, shall have the meanings given to such terms in the 8% Convertible Debenture issued as of February 1, 2007 (the “Debenture”).


 


WHEREAS,  as set forth in the Addendum to the Debenture dated as of January 31, 2010 (the “Addendum”) the Company promised to pay to the Holder, or its registered assigns, upon due presentation and surrender of the Debenture, on or after January 31, 2012, the principal amount of ___________________ ($____________); and


 


WHEREAS, the Company and Holder desire to further modify the aforementioned Debenture for the mutual benefit of both parties;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:


 


1. The modifications of the Debenture herein will be effective as of the Second Addendum Effective Date and will remain in effect for the duration of the Debenture unless further modified in writing by the parties hereto.


 


2. The Maturity Date of January 31, 2012 set forth in the Addendum shall be replaced with [July 31, 2012] or [January 31, 2014].


 


3. Other than as specifically modified in this Second Addendum, all other terms, conditions and covenants of the Debenture shall remain in full force and effect.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Second Addendum, effective as of the Second Addendum Effective Date.


 




	SCIVANTA MEDICAL CORPORATION	 	HOLDER	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	 	
 

	 	
 

	 
	Name:	 	
Thomas S. Gifford

	 	
Holder

	 
	Title:	 	
Executive Vice President and

	 	
 

	 
	 	 	

Chief Financial Officer
#### Ronald Coleman, Appellant, v Nassau County, Respondent.

[768 NYS2d 371]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for alleged civil rights violations, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), entered October 18, 2002, which granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CELR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. The complaint was unintelligible, and lacked specificity and any legally cognizable claim *(see Kung v Pan,*285 AD2d 532 [2001]). Ritter, J.P., Smith, Friedmann, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.
[Cite as Lenard v. Russo, 133 Ohio St.3d 152, 2012-Ohio-4236.]

L ENARD , A PPELLANT , v. R USSO , J UDGE , A PPELLEE . [Cite as Lenard v. Russo, 133 Ohio St.3d 152, 2012-Ohio-4236.] Prohibition—Writ sought to compel judge to vacate a conviction and sentence— Judge did not patently and unambiguously lack jurisdiction—Court of appeals’ dismissal of complaint for writ affirmed. (No. 2012-0967—Submitted September 12, 2012—Decided September 20, 2012.)
A PPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 98106, 2012-Ohio-2397.

__________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} We affirm the judgment dismissing the petition of appellant, Richard Lenard, for a writ of prohibition to compel appellee, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Judge John J. Russo, to vacate his conviction and sentence for violating a temporary protection orde r. Judge Russo did not patently and unambiguously lack jurisdiction to convict and sentence Lenard because the court had jurisdiction over the criminal proceeding, including sentencing, see R.C. 2931.03, and Lenard’s plea of guilty to the charge of violating a temporary protection order constituted a complete admission of the charge, Shie v. Leonard
, 84 Ohio St.3d 160, 161, 702 N.E.2d 419 (1998), and Crim.R. 11(B)(1). Lenard had an adequate remedy by appeal from hi s sentencing entry to raise his claim of sentencing error. State ex rel. Hudson v. Sutula , 131 Ohio St.3d 177, 2012-Ohio554, 962 N.E.2d 798, ¶ 1; State ex rel. Pruitt v. Donnelly , 129 Ohio St.3d 498, 2011-Ohio-4203, 954 N.E.2d 117, ¶ 2. Judgment affirmed.
O’C ONNOR , C.J., and P FEIFER , L UNDBERG S TRATTON , O’D ONNELL , L ANZINGER , C UPP , and M C G EE B ROWN , JJ., concur.S UPREME C OURT OF O HIO

2 _____________________ Richard Lenard, pro se.

_____________________
|                                                                                               
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                               
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                           
|View History:                                                                                  
|                                                                                               
|Illinois Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                               
|                                                                                               
|Illinois Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Depleted Fields Capacity  (Million 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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 51,418 | 51,418
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 87,368 | 87,368 | 87,368 | 11,768 | 11,768 | 11,768 | 11,768 | 53,108 | 51,768 | 51,768
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 51,768 | 51,768 | 53,308 |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
|                                                                                 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                 
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                   
|View History: Annual                                                             
|View History: Annual                                                             
|View History:                                                                    
|                                                                                 
|Illinois Natural Gas Number of Commercial Consumers - Sales  (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                 
|                                                                                 
|Illinois Natural Gas Number of Commercial Consumers - Sales  (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                 

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1  | Year-2  | Year-3  | Year-4  | Year-5  | Year-6  | Year-7  | Year-8  | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | -------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |         |         |         |         |         |         |         |         | 239,750 | 225,926
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 219,665 | 213,741 | 218,490 | 223,223 | 216,827 | 219,323 | 242,091 |         |         |        
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 240,197 | 241,582 | 244,480 | 225,913 | 235,097 | 231,780 | 232,749 | 232,686 | 233,458 | 234,457
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 234,519 | 237,179 | 237,553 |         |         |         |         |         |         |        
|- = 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
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MentorCorporation (the "Company") on Form 10‐Q for the period ending June30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the "Report"), I, Christopher J. Conway, Chief Executive Officerof the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best ofmy knowledge:

(1)        TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)        Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

/S/CHRISTOPHER J. CONWAYChristopher J. ConwayChief Executive OfficerAugust 13, 2003
EXHIBIT 99.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned chief financial officer of Taylor Capital Group, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies that:



(i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2002
(the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     
|---------------------
|Dated: March 20, 2003
|                     
|
#### Sumora LIDELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-1499

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[October 19, 2017]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach *1033County; Krista Marx, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 502014CF000511AXXXXMB and 502014CF000507AXXXXMB.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE MAY
DEPARTMENT STORES COMPANY FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MAY 1, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-01-1999
<CASH>                                              18
<SECURITIES>                                       134
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,977
<ALLOWANCES>                                        71
<INVENTORY>                                      2,930
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,057
<PP&E>                                           7,356
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,850
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,576
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,096
<BONDS>                                          3,791
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,846
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,576
<SALES>                                          2,941
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,053
<CGS>                                            2,150
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,150
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  71
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    203
<INCOME-TAX>                                        81
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                122
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       122
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .34


</TABLE>
No. 12-5700.

#### Fuiava *v.*California.

Sup. Ct. Cal. Certio-rari denied.
EXHIBIT
32.1





SECTION
1350 CERTIFICATION





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, Richard Brehm, President and Chief Executive
Officer of Lincolnway Energy, LLC, certify that to my knowledge (i) Lincolnway
Energy, LLC's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30,
2009 (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 Lincolnway Energy, LLC.





Date:  December
22, 2009





/s/ Richard BrehmRichard
      Brehm, President and ChiefExecutive
      Officer





[A signed
original of this written statement has been provided to Lincolnway Energy, LLC
and will be retained by Lincolnway Energy, LLC and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]


E-34