alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-21054

Summary Calendar

MONICA LORTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

CHRISTUS ST JOHN HOSPITAL; ET AL,

 Defendants,

CHRISTUS ST. JOHN HOSPITAL,

 Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(H-99-CV-1876)

July 17, 2001

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

AFFIRMED. See 5TH CIR. R. 47.6.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Chassie WIGGINS, Appellant.

No. ED 106207

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.

Filed: March 26, 2019

Jessica Hathaway, 120 South Central Ave, Suite 130, St. Louis, MO. 63105, for appellant.

Robert J. Bartholomew Jr., P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO. 65102, for respondent.

Before Roy L. Richter, P.J., Robert M. Clayton III, J., Angela T. Quigless, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM.

Chassie Wiggins ("Wiggins") appeals the judgment of the circuit court following a jury trial in which he was convicted of first-degree sodomy and first-degree sexual abuse. Wiggins argues the circuit court abused its discretion in denying his motion for new trial and failing to hold a hearing to determine whether the jury's verdicts should be set aside because the circuit court had information suggesting that the jurors speculated about, or obtained extrinsic evidence of, Wiggins's prior involvement in a similar sexual offense. We have *204reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we find the circuit court did not abuse its discretion. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to MO. R. CIV. P. 84.16(b) (2018).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          56,865
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  122,004
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (5,425)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      11,233,310
<DEPRECIATION>                              (5,174,077)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,477,059
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          739,126
<BONDS>                                      7,467,645
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,270,288
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,477,059
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,724,538
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,835,482
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            (4,457,980)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             635,375
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,711,661
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,711,611
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,711,661
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    71.66
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    71.66


</TABLE>
#### State of West Virginia *v.*William D. Phillips *et al.*

(CC 518)

Submitted September 12, 1934.

Decided September 25, 1934.

*Everett F. Moore,*for plaintiff.

*Walter A. McGlumphy,*for defendant Wm. S. Hum-bert.

Litz, Judge:

This is a certificate under Code, 58-5-2, involving the action of the circuit court, overruling a demurrer to the bill in a suit to sell as forfeited for the benefit of the *363state school fund a tract of 7257 acres of minerals, owned jointly by numerous persons, in Marshall County. The bill alleges that the property has become forfeited under section 6, Article XIII of the Constitution, for failure of the owners to have it charged for taxes on the land books of Marshall County for five successive years. Since 1927, the property has been assessed separately to the respective owners according to their undivided interests. The acreages on which taxes have not been paid during that period follow: 1927, 1132 acres; 1928, 2412 acres; 1929, 2835 acres; 1930, 4555 acres; 1931, 6587 acres; 1932, 6587 acres. A sale has been ordered without a reference.

The owners contend that the assessments by undivided interests prevented forfeiture notwithstanding the taxes were only partially discharged. The state, on the other hand, insists that the attempted assessments by undivided interests, which were illegal, void and unenforceable *(Toothman*v. *Courtney,*62 W. Va. 167, 58 S. E. 915; *Lafollette*v. *Nelson,*113 W. Va. 906, 170 S. E. 168), did not constitute a charge of the property upon the land books within the meaning of the Constitution. “If it is undertaken to assess land separately by undivided interests therein, or separately by aliquot parts representing the undivided interests, and any undivided interest is omitted for a period of five successive years, the title of the entire tract will become forfeited and vest in the state, notwithstanding entry and payment may have been made as to other undivided interests.” *Carretta Ry. Co.*v. *Fisher,*74 W. Va. 115, 81 S. E. 710. It is argued for the owners that the principle should not be extended to a case where the entire acreage has been assessed by undivided interests, although none of the taxes is paid, upon the theory that such assessment constitutes a charge on the land books in compliance with the Constitution. We do not share this view for the reason that its application would necessarily preclude the state from collecting any taxes on real estate. It could not proceed by an ordinary tax sale, because the assessment is illegal and would carry no title by sale either to an individual *364or the state; and if the assessment by undivided interests prevents a forfeiture, the state could never sell in a school land proceeding. ■ We are therefore clearly of opinion' that title to the property is forfeited, and that the state may proceed to sell for its unpaid taxes. But -as part of the taxes has been paid, the cause is remanded to the- circuit court for the purpose of ascertaining the amount of unpaid taxes before a sale is directed.

The ruling certified is, accordingly, affirmed and the cause remanded for’ further proceedings. - '

*Affirmed and remanded.*
Source: Outlook Trend Tables (http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/industry/otea/industry_sector/tables_naics.htm)

SIC codes 97_exports 98_exports 99_exports 00_exports 01_exports 02_exports 97_imports 98_imports 99_imports 00_imports 01_imports 02_imports

2611 3,253 2,774 2,813 3,556 2,848 2,788 2,572 2,392 2,545 3,302 2,614 2,333

2621 5,014 4,754 4,608 5,108 4,574 3,684 7,978 8,650 8,792 9,718 9,404 8,671

2631 49 62 48 70 45 49 72 84 119 125 108 93

2676 2,122 2,015 2,120 2,273 2,261 1,916 1,298 1,504 1,659 1,969 2,027 2,116

2679 474 484 503 512 465 575 389 385 427 498 483 717

2812 828 840 787 867 1,060 854 186 193 128 164 221 168

2813 154 147 140 175 159 138 78 88 92 87 80 94

2816 857 912 934 1,150 1,032 1,150 682 679 739 821 740 797

2819 5,252 4,601 4,467 5,260 5,354 5,404 4,985 5,044 5,163 6,025 5,864 5,693

2821 10,859 10,275 10,438 12,392 11,878 12,194 4,394 4,518 4,826 5,764 5,611 5,642

2823 624 547 479 491 505 478 168 150 126 99 76 91

2824 1,522 1,414 1,297 1,463 1,106 1,212 1,384 1,423 1,426 1,564 1,470 1,537

2833 3,332 3,830 3,892 4,291 4,437 4,751 7,499 9,140 12,580 17,400 18,631 19,271

2834 5,015 6,017 7,522 9,008 11,150 11,016 5,562 7,711 9,626 9,947 13,260 19,015

2865 2,967 2,666 3,002 3,739 2,702 3,036 3,314 2,993 3,318 4,438 3,714 4,035

2869 15,166 13,915 14,492 16,346 15,739 15,217 12,321 12,240 13,401 16,528 16,371 16,089

2873 3,077 3,286 2,984 2,316 2,119 2,118 1,297 1,180 1,150 1,514 1,911 1,400

2899 2,863 2,733 2,579 2,830 2,764 2,874 1,479 1,500 1,479 1,579 1,543 1,605

2911 6,882 5,187 5,763 8,728 8,074 7,734 20,434 17,060 21,886 40,069 35,127 31,857

3312 4,852 4,598 4,221 4,888 4,666 4,448 13,818 16,902 12,990 15,313 11,756 12,394

3313 163 113 88 106 86 64 1,196 1,163 1,087 1,275 822 923

3315 344 347 362 360 354 321 1,025 1,072 1,128 1,170 1,073 1,168

3316

3317

3334 628 553 613 636 466 431 3,554 3,775 3,969 4,297 4,085 4,188

3353 2,438 2,322 2,228 2,298 2,038 1,808 1,280 1,391 1,440 1,620 1,442 1,574
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 52 (Thursday, March 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 11750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6088]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[USITC SE-09-008]


Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

Agency Holding the Meeting: United States International Trade 
Commission.

Time and Date: March 24, 2009 at 11 a.m.

Place: Room 101, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Telephone: 
(202) 205-2000.

Status: Open to the public.

Matters To Be Considered:
    1. Agenda for future meetings: None.
    2. Minutes.
    3. Ratification list.
    4. Inv. No. 731-TA-1021 (Review) (Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings 
From China)--briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled 
to transmit its determination and Commissioners' opinions to the 
Secretary of Commerce on or before April 1, 2009.)
    5. Outstanding action jackets: None.
    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting.

    Issued: March 17, 2009.

    By order of the Commission.
William R. Bishop,
Hearings and Meetings Coordinator.
 [FR Doc. E9-6088 Filed 3-17-09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Jackson Hewitt Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements on
Form S-8 (No. 33-77948 and No. 333-      ) of Jackson Hewitt Inc. of our report
dated June 9, 1997, except as to note 16, which is as of June 27, 1997,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Jackson Hewitt Inc. and
subsidiaries as of April 30, 1996 and 1997 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of
the years in the three-year period ended April 30, 1997, which report
appears in the April 30, 1997 annual report on Form 10-K of Jackson
Hewitt Inc.

Our report refers to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 121, Accounting for the Impairment of Long-Lived
Assets and for Long-Lived Assets to Be Disposed Of and SFAS No. 114,
Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan, as amended by SFAS No. 118,
Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan-Income Recognition
and Disclosure, in 1996.

                                                     /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Norfolk, Virginia
July 29, 1997
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations

West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.

Washington, DC 20590

Application to Amend

Section 333 Exemption No. 11351

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-1081

December 18, 2015

Petitioner:

bizUAS corp

Bernd Lutz, PhD

CEO

4845 Pearl East Circle, Suite 101

Boulder, CO 80301

Tel: 303.931.4126

Email: bernd@bizUAS.com

Website: www.bizUAS.com

Greetings,

By letter from the FAA dated April 17, 2015, an exemption was granted to bizUAS corp for relief under 

Section 333. That letter was marked Section 333 Exemption No. 11351 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-

1081. 

bizUAS corp hereby requests that the exemption so granted be amended to include DJI Inspire and DJI 

Matrice models. Relevant facts and reasoning are:

 The DJI Inspire and DJI Matrice are advanced evolutions of the DJI Phantom 3 model which 

was approved in bizUAS’ Exemption No. 11351B.

 Size, weight and performance specification of the DJI Inspire (“I”) and DJI Matrix (“M”) are

substantially similar to those of the approved DJI Phantom 3 (“P3”) in all relevant respects:

o Gross weight (MTOW): P3=1280g; I=2935g; M=3400g

o Diagonal Size (including propellers): P3=590mm; I=581mm; M=650mm

o Maximum Ascent Speed: P3=5m/sec; I=5m/sec M=5m/sec

o Maximum Descent Speed: P3=3m/sec; I=4m/sec; M=4m/s

o Vertical Hover Accuracy: P3=+/-10cm; I=+/-50cm; M=+/-50cm

o Horizontal Hover Accuracy: P3=+/-1m; I=+/-2.5m; M=+/-2.5m

o Maximum Speed: P3=16m/sec; I=22m/sec; M=22m/sec

 The findings, rationale and conclusions contained in FAA’s Exemption No. 11351 and 11351B

apply without modification to this application to include the DJI Inspire and DJI Matrice in 

Exemption No. 11351.

Thank you for your consideration of this important request. Please advise us of any additional 

information that may be required.

Sincerely,

Bernd Lutz, PhD

CEO, bizUAS corp
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

FIOR RODRIGUEZ
, Appellant,

v.

UNIVERSAL PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 20

- 1352

[ May 13, 2021 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; William W. Haury, Jr. , Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE18

- 001866

.

Frantz C. Nelson of Font & Nelson, PLLC, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Elizabeth K. Russo and Paulo R. Lima o f Russo Appellate Firm, P.A., Miami, and Steven J. Chackman of Bernstein, Chackman, Liss, Hollywood, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ROSS

, G ERBER
, and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 13.1



Certification

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)



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), each of the undersigned officers
of Ecopetrol S.A. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:



The annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Form 20-F”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Dated: April 29, 2013 |     |                          |                        
|--------------------- | --- | ------------------------ | -----------------------
|                      |     |                          |                        
|                      | By: | /s/ Javier G. Gutíerrez 
|                      |     | Name:                    | Javier G. Gutiérrez    
|                      |     | Title:                   | Chief Executive Officer
|                      |     |                          |                        
|Dated: April 29, 2013 |     |                          |                        
|                      |     |                          |                        
|                      | By: | /s/ Adriana M. Echeverri
|                      |     | Name:                    | Adriana M. Echeverri   
|                      |     | Title:                   | Chief Financial Officer
1 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 10

- 1806

_____________
ROBERT R. BAREFOOT; DEONNA ENTERPRISES, INC.,

Appellants

v.

WELLNESS PUBLISHING; HOLT M. D. CONSULTING, INC.; NATURES BENEFIT, INC.; STEPHEN HOLT,

_____________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Civ. No. 3

- 06

- cv

- 02942 ) Dist rict Judge: Hon. Joel A. Pisano

Submitted pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Before: McKEE

, Chief Judge , SCIRICA and RENDELL

, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: July 27, 2011 )

__________

OPINION

__________

McKEE, Chief Judge

.
Robert Barefoot and Deonna Enterp rises, Inc. app eal the district court’s grant of partial

summary judgment to Wellness Publishing, Holt M.D. Consulting, Inc., Nature’s Benefit, Inc.,

and Stephen Holt. For the reasons set forth below, we will affirm.2

Because we write primarily for the par ties , we need not repeat the facts or p rocedural

history of this case. Moreover, the district court ha s ably summarized the relevant background.

See Barefoot v. Wellness Publ’ g , 2009 WL 4143110 (D.N.J. Nov. 17, 2009)

. On appeal,

Appellants argue that th e district court erred when it granted summary judgment to Stephen Holt

and dismissed all claims against him.

In his detailed and thoughtful opinion

, Judge Pisano care fully and clearly explained his

reasons for dismissing Holt from the lawsuit

. See id

. H e reiterated these reasons in his opinion

and order denying Appellants’ motion for reconsideration. See Barefoot v. Wellness Publ’g

,
2010 WL 893571 (D.N.J. Mar. 8, 2010). W e can add little to Judge Pisano ’s analysis and

discussion and we will therefore a ffirm the district court’s o rder for substantially the same

reasons as set for th in that opinion

.
Exhibit 32.1   CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350   In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bohai Pharmaceuticals Group, Inc. for the period ended June 30, 2014, I, HongweiQu, Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1. Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2014, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2014, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Bohai Pharmaceuticals Group, Inc.


|                        |                                            
|----------------------- | -------------------------------------------
|Dated: October 14, 2014 | /s/ Hongwei Qu                             
|                        | Hongwei Qu                                 
|                        | Chief Executive Officer and Chairman       
|                        | (principal executive and financial officer)

1
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

Certification of CEO under Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

*I certify that this periodic reportcontaining the issuer’s financial statements fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in this periodicreport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the issuer.*

 
|   | *By:*                                | */s/ Keith C. Robbins* |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------|------------------------|--------|
|   |                                 |
|   | *President, Chief Executive Officer* |
|   |                                 |
|   | *Date:*                              | *June 7, 2004*         |   |
|        |                                      |                        |        |  |  |

 

----
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





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 Accelerated Acquisitions V, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:





The
annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 (the
"Form 10-K") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
      March 30, 2010/s/ Timothy NeherTimothy
      NeherPrincipal
      Executive OfficerPrincipal
      Financial Officer





A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to ACQUISITIONS V,
INC. and will be retained by ACCELERATED ACQUISITIONS V, INC. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 13.1




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


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906
OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Annual Report of Ecopetrol S.A. (the “Company”) on
Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Javier G. Gutiérrez, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the U.S.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:




(i) 
         the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. 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 the Company.




By:
                /s/ Javier G. GutiérrezName: 
      Javier G. GutiérrezTitle: 
      Chief Executive Officer




Dated: 
June 29, 2009




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.





1
Converted by EDGARwiz


Exhibit 10.50




TERMS OF LOAN AGREEMENT




Principal Amount:

$95,000

Lender:

Michael Cohen

Borrower:

Proteonomix, Inc. (a Delaware corporation)

Interest:

Non-interest-bearing

Repayment:

On or before December 31, 2011

Promissory Note:

Oral agreement (no promissory note)
In the MATTER OF: Voter Challenge Brought by Mark MADARA Before the Mecklenburg County Board of Elections; Sabrina Blain - Challenged Voter

No. COA19-26

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 2, 2019

REVERSED AND REMANDED.