alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# U n i ted S t a te s C ou r t o f Appe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 20-5175 September Term, 2021 1: 20-c v -007 65-UNA Filed O n: April 14 , 20 22 Dann y Fab ricant, App ellant
v . Fede ral Electio n Com mission an d A lex Pad illa, California Secret aryof Sta te, App ellees ON A PPE A L FROM THE UNITED STA TES DIS TRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: Hend erson , Rogers, a nd T ate l, Circuit Jud ges J U D G M E N T T his ap pea l was co nside red o n th e reco rd f rom the United Sta tes District Cou rt for th e District of

Colum bia a nd on app ellant ’s brief , th e su pple me nt t here to, and app ellant ’s respo nse to t he Decem ber 8 , 20 21 orde r to sh ow cause. Se e Fe d. R. App

. P. 3 4(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). Itis ORDERED A ND A DJUDGED tha t th e d istrict court’s o rder f iled o n A pril 21, 202 0, b e a f

f irmed as m odif ied t o ref lect a dism issal w ithou t prejudice for lack o f stan ding. A ppe llant la cks Article II I sta ndin g to cha llenge 52 U.S.C. § 3 010 1(2)—un der 52 U.S.C. § 30 110 or o the rw ise—be cause he ha s no t de mo nstrat ed causa tion and redressa bility . S ee Luja n v. Defend ers of W ildlife , 50 4 U.S . 55 5, 5 60– 61 (199 2) (ex plainin g that “the irreducible const itution al m inimu m of stan ding” requires “an inju ry in fact,” “a causa l conn ection be tween the injury and the con ductcom plaine d o f ,” an d a likelihood “tha t th e inju ry w ill be red ressed by a favorable d ecision” (inte rnal quot ation ma rks om itted )). First, app ellantha s no t sho w n th at § 30 101 (2), w hich d ef ines “cand idate ” for pu rpose s of the Fed eral Ele ction Cam paign A ct, im pose s qualif ication s for fede ral of

f ice. Co nseque ntly, he h as n ot d em onst rated tha t § 301 01(2 ) cause d h is alleged injury

—i.e., his na me no t be ing include d o n a prima ry ba llot. S econ d, a ppe llant has ef fectively con cede d th at h e d id no t com ply w ith California’s requirem ent s tha t he pay a f iling fe e (or su bm it signature s in lieu the reof ), sub mit nom inatio n p ape rs, an d subm it a d eclarat ion o f can dida cy . S ee Cal. Ele c. Cod e § § 8 020 , 81 05, 81 06. Conse quently, decla ring § 30 101 (2) unco nstitu tiona l would no t rem edy app ellant ’s

# U n i ted S t a te s C ou r t o f Appe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 20-5175 September Term, 2021 alleged injury

be cause he still would ha v e b een ineligible to ha v e h is nam e inclu ded on the prima ry

ba llot. Pursua nt t o D.C. Circuit Ru le 36 , th is dispo sition will no t be pu blished . T he Clerk is directe d to w ithho ld issua nce of the m and ate he rein u ntil seven d ays af ter reso lution of an y tim ely petition for rehe aring or pe tition for rehe aring en ban c. S ee Fed. R. Ap p. P. 4 1(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41

. Per Curiam

Page 2
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 8, 2023

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

________________

No. 3D23

- 0220

Lower Tribunal No s

. F16

- 6834B, F11

- 19406

________________



### Derrick V. Hoskin

, Appellant,

vs.



### The State of Florida

, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from

the Circuit Court for Miami

- Dade County, Carmen Cabarga , Judge.

Derrick V. Hoskin , in proper person.

Ashley Moody , Attorney General, and Magaly Rodriguez, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SCALES, LINDSEY

, and GORDO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# o

U.S . Departmen t o f Transportatio n Federa l Aviatio n Admlnlstfotio n 

### OCT 

### i 1 

## 201 ) , L . I 1 I W I iJTATi n L: r 

### -" 1 Ai rTraffi c Organizatio n Technica l Operatio n Service s Aviatio n Syste m Standard s Pete rW Gretsc h Directo ro f Operation s P O Bo x2508 2 Oklahom a City , O K7312 5

U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n Docke t Operations , IVI-3 0 Wes t Buildin g grou d tloor , Roo mWI2-I4 0 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S E Washington , D C 2059 0 Subject : Reques t

fo r Extensio n o f

Exemptio n No . 5118 , Regulatory Docke t #FAA-2001-9128 . Dea r Sirs : FA A Aviatio n Syste mStandards , Operatin g Certificat e #RU3A796LJ , request s tha t i t b e grante da n extensio n o f

exemptio n No . 5118 , a s amended . Exemptio n from91.11 9 (b ) an d(c) , 91.159 . 91.17 5 (a ) an d(b) , 91.179 , 91.51 5 (a)(1 ) an d(a ) (2 ) o f titl e 1 4 CF Rtha t

permit s FA A Fligh t Inspectio n aircraf

t t o deviat e fro mspecifi c fligh t rule s require db y subpart B o f par t 9 1 whil e conductin g fligh t

check s o f

ai r navigatio n facilitie s an dinstrumen t approac h procedures . Ther e hav e bee n n o change s i n th e condition s an dreason s relativ e t o publi c interes t an dsafet y that wer e th e basi s for

grantin g th e origina l exemption . W e believ e continue doperatio n unde r th e provision s o f

th e exemptio n woul db e i n th e publi c interest . Additionally , w e reques t

that th e exemptio n perio db e grante dfo r aperio do f

a t leas t thre e years , o r longe r i f permitted . Thank yo u for you r consideration . Sincerely , Pete r W . Gretsc h Directo r o f Operation s Aviatio n Syste mStandard s Email : Petcr.W.Gretsch@faa.go v
**Exhibit 31.1**Certification of Principal Executive OfficerI, Peter A. Edison, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bakers Footwear Group, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;(b) [reserved](c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        December 12, 2006   /s/ Peter A. Edison    Peter A. Edison    Chairman of the Board andChief Executive OfficerBakers Footwear Group, Inc.(Principal Executive Officer)
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**

**CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

I, Eden Clark; Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Global Club, Inc. (the “Registrant”), do hereby certify pursuant to Rule 15d-l4(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code that:

|  

(1)     

the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Registrant for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2010 (the “Report”), to which this statement is filed as an exhibit, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

 

 

 

(2)

the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

Dated: December 1, 2010                                                                        

By:

*/s/ Eden Clark*

 

 

Eden Clark

 

 

Chief Executive Officer and

 

 

Chief Financial Officer

                 
              |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
##### 



Exhibit 10 (d8) TENTH AMENDMENT TO THE
CAPITOL BANCORP LTD.
EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN The Capitol Bancorp Ltd. Employee Stock Ownership Plan is hereby amended effective July 1,
2004 by adding the following participating employer at the end of the list therein contained: Name of
    
    Type of
    
    State of
    
    Date ofEmployer
    
    Entity
    
    Organization
    
    ParticipationFirst Carolina State Bank
    
    Banking Corp.
    
    North Carolina
    
    July 1, 2004
 CAPITOL BANCORP LIMITEDDated: December 1, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Joseph D. ReidJoseph D. ReidChairman and CEOFIRST CAROLINA STATE BANKDated: December 1, 2004
    
    By:
    
    /s/ David ParkerDavid ParkerPresident and CEO
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

IN RE CHRISTOPHER JOHN RUDY

______________________ 

2013-1673

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Serial No. 

07/425,360.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

CHRISTOPHER JOHN RUDY, of Port Huron, Michigan,

argued pro se. 

COKE MORGAN STEWART, Associate Solicitor, Office of 

the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, 

of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for appellee. With her on 

the brief were NATHAN K. KELLEY, Solicitor, THOMAS W.

KRAUSE, Special Counsel for IP Litigation, and AMY J.

NELSON, Associate Solicitor. 

______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 
 

 PER CURIAM (RADER, Chief Judge, LINN, and TARANTO,

Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

March 13, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

Date Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Clerk of Court
### Order entered February 6, 2013

In The



##  ̄ ,ourt of p eaIS

No. 05-12-00576-CV 

### EX PARTE: JESSE P. SKINNER On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. X11-1264-K



### ORDER Before the Court is appellant’s February 1, 2013 motion for objection to the supplemental clerk’s record filed in this Court on January 25, 2013. Appellant complains that the Dallas County Respondents’ Motion for Summary Judgment contained in the supplemental clerk’s record does not contain the clerk’s seal. Appellant attaches to his motion his own copy of the motion for summary judgment that contains the District Clerk’s seal certifying that it ~s a true and correct copy of the document. Page fifteen of the supplemental clerk’s record contains the District Clerk’s certification that all documents in the supplemental clerk’s record are true and correct cop~es. Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s motion to the extent that it requests that the 

### Court order the original document. To the extent appellant asks that the Court return to him his copy of the documentsattached to his motion, we DEFER that determination to the submissions panel.



### /s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
#### In the Matter of Anthony Abbate, Petitioner, v Howard Safir, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

[719 NYS2d 31]

Determination of respondent Police Commissioner dated December 11, 1996, dismissing petitioner from his position as a police officer, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.], entered September 18, 1998), dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence supports respondent’s findings that petitioner lied at his official interview when he stated that he did not utter profanities to another officer, and, in a separate incident, was discourteous and disrespectful to another officer in uttering racial epithets in an argument. No basis exists to disturb respondent’s findings of credibility *(see, Matter of Berenhaus v Ward,*70 NY2d 436, 443-444). Given petitioner’s poor disciplinary record, the penalty of dismissal does not shock our sense of fairness. Concur — Williams, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.
#### James Cook *v.*Compensation Commissioner

(No. 7558)

Submitted February 14, 1933.

Decided February 21, 1933.

*England*cfc *liitchie,*for relator.

*H. B. Lee,*Attorney General, and *B. Dennis Steed,*Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Woods, Judge:

James Cook, who, on December 21, 1929, had his left ankle crushed in a slate fall, was granted a 20% partial permanent disability rating, the payments under the award expiring July 10, 1931. After much importuning on the part of the claimant, beginning within the year following the last payment, the commissioner finally refused to consider a petition, and attached exhibits, filed on January 3, 1933, on the ground *371that bis jurisdiction in the premises was at an end. Citing Code 1931, 23-4-16. Thereupon, the present petition in mandamus was presented to this court, praying that the commissioner be required to grant claimant a hearing, as provided in Code 1931, 23-5-1.

In the case of *Bonner*v. *Commissioner,*110 W. Va. 38, 156 S. E. 847, this court held: “"When the State Compensation Commissioner has passed upon a claim and later proper representations are made to him of a progressive and aggravated condition of the injury not considered by him at his finding, he should reopen the case, provided his jurisdiction thereof has not ended.” To like effect: *Yacomolish*v. *Commissioner,*110 W. Va. 79, 157 S. E. 45. In the foregoing cases, the injuries occurred prior to the passage of the act of 1929. In the *Bonner*case, the court said: “Code, 1923, chapter 15P, section 40, expressly confers on the commissioner continuing jurisdiction over each case, with the power to make from time to time such modifications of former findings as may be justified. This jurisdiction is not impaired by the amendment of 1929, as to cases originating prior to the amendment. *Jenkins*v. *Commissioner,*107 W. Va. 287, 148 S. E. 117.”

It appears from the record that on November 8, 1932, additional ex parte evidence having been submitted prior thereto, claimant was advised by letter that “after considering all the evidence filed, the commissioner is of opinion that with payments already made, you have been fully compensated for the disability arising on account of the injury set up in this claim, and that your claim stands closed as of the date of the last payment” (July 10, 1931). Such ruling, in absence of objection, became final after ten days’ notice to the interested party. *Enyart*v. *Commissioner,*109 W. Va. 613; *Lane*v. *Commissioner,*112 W. Va. 205, 164 S. E. 24. Without deciding whether on timely objection, the commissioner could have granted a hearing thereon (more than a year having elapsed since the last award), we believe that the ruling of November 18, 1932, having become final, clearly placed the new petition of January 4, 1933, beyond the one-year limitation of Code 1931, 23-4-16.

The writ is accordingly denied.

*Writ denied.*
Lisa Janette EARLEYWINE, Respondent, v. Ehren Larry EARLEYWINE, Appellant.

WD 81330

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Filed: December 18, 2018

Helen L. Wade, Columbia, for appellant.

Edward C. Clausen, Kimberly Guthrie, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before Division One: Lisa White Hardwick, Presiding Judge, Edward R. Ardini, Jr., And Thomas N. Chapman, Judges

**ORDER**

Per Curiam

Ehren Earleywine appeals from the judgment dissolving his marriage to Lisa Earleywine. He contends the circuit court erred in awarding maintenance. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would have no precedential value.

AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 284 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 284

   Commending and congratulating the University of Connecticut Men's 
      Basketball Team for winning the 2023 NCAA Men's Basketball 
                             Championship.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 10, 2023

Mr. Courtney (for himself, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mr. 
 Himes, and Mrs. Hayes) submitted the following resolution; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Commending and congratulating the University of Connecticut Men's 
      Basketball Team for winning the 2023 NCAA Men's Basketball 
                             Championship.

Whereas, on Monday, April 3, 2023, the University of Connecticut Men's 
        Basketball Team (referred to in this preamble as the ``UConn Huskies'') 
        won the 2023 NCAA Men's Basketball Championship with a 76-59 win over 
        the San Diego State Aztecs at NRG Stadium in Houston, Texas;
Whereas this is the UConn Huskies fifth national championship, continuing the 
        team's undefeated streak in national championship games;
Whereas all five titles were earned since 1999, a feat no other college team has 
        surpassed;
Whereas Adama Sanogo was named the Most Outstanding Player of the tournament, 
        averaging 19.7 points per game with four double-doubles; and
Whereas the UConn Huskies won every NCAA tournament game by 13 points or more, 
        becoming only the fifth team in history to do so: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) commends the University of Connecticut Men's Basketball 
        Team for winning the 2023 NCAA Men's Basketball Championship;
            (2) congratulates the fans, students, and faculty of the 
        University of Connecticut; and
            (3) respectfully requests that the Clerk of the House of 
        Representatives transmit an enrolled copy of this resolution 
        to--
                    (A) the President of the University of Connecticut, 
                Radenka Maric; and
                    (B) the Head Coach of the University of Connecticut 
                Men's Basketball Team, Dan Hurley.
                                 <all>
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 14, 2020

No. 04-20-00371-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L.M., ET AL CHILDREN,

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019-PA-02077

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant Mom’s brief was due to be filed with this court on September 14, 2020. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). Before the due date, Mom filed a motion for a fourteen-day extension of 

time to file her brief.

Appellant Mom’s motion is GRANTED. Her brief is due on September 28, 2020. 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 14th day of September, 2020.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ,

Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 32.2**

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

*Icertify that this periodic report containing the issuer’s financial statementsfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15 (d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that informationcontained in this periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.*
| * * |                                                   | *By:*   | */s/ John F. Coger* | * * |
|----------|---------------------------------------------------|---------|---------------------|----------|
| * * | * *                                          |
|     | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer |
|     | and Chief Operating Officer                       |
|     |                                              |
| * * | * *                                          | *Date:* | *May 9, 2007*       | * * |
|          |                                                   |         |                     |          |  |  |

 

----
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

In connection with the accompanying annual report on Form 10-K of Blue Gem
Enterprise for the year ended May 31, 2009, I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to my knowledge, that:

     (1)  the annual Report on Form 10-K of Blue Gem Enterprise for the year
          ended May 31, 2009 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 annual Report on Form 10-K for the
          year ended May 31, 2009, fairly presents in all material respects, the
          financial condition and results of operations of Blue Gem Enterprise.


/s/ Joseph Meuse
--------------------------------------------
By:    Joseph Meuse
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

Date: August 4, 2009