alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T FEB RUARY 25, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N o

. 0 8

- 1 4 8 6 6 N o n - A r g u m e n t C a l e n d a r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 3

- 0 0 2 2 7

- C R

- T

- 1 7

- T G W

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ,
P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e ,

v e r s u s

D A R I A N T E N S L E Y , a

. k

. a

. D r a c ,
D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e M i d d l e D i s t r i c t o f F l o r i d a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( F e b r u a r y 2 5 , 2 0 0 9 )

B e f o r e B A R K E T T , P R Y O R a n d C O X , C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.
P E R C U R I A M :

E l l i s R e x w o o d C u r r y , a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l f o r D a r i a n T e n s l e y , h a s m o v e d t ow i t h d r a w f r o m f u r t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e a p p e l l a n t a n d h a s f i l e d a b r i e f p u r s u a n t

t o A n d e r s v

. C a l i

f o r n i a , 3 8 6 U

. S

. 7 3 8 , 8 7 S

. C t

. 1 3 9 6 ( 1 9 6 7 )

. O u r i n d e p e n d e n t r e v i e w

o f t h e e n t i r e r e c o r d r e v e a l s t h a t c o u n s e l ’ s a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e r e l a t i v e m e r i t o f t h e

a p p e a l i s c o r r e c t

. B e c a u s e i n d e p e n d e n t e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e r e c o r d r e v e a l s n o a r g u a b l e
i s s u e s o f m e r i t , c o u n s e l ’ s m o t i o n t o w i t h d r a w i s G R A N T E D , a n d t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e
d i s t r i c t c o u r t i s A F F I R M E D

.

2
----

Euro exchange rates (1)

27 July 2005

(2005/C 185/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 13102-003]

                    a.                     *Date and Time of Meeting:*                     January 8, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (11:00 a.m. Central Standard Time).                

                    b.                     *Place:*                     Telephone conference.                

                    c.                     *FERC Contact:*                     Sarah Salazar at                     *sarah.salazar@ferc.gov,*                     or (202) 502-6863.                

                    d.                     *Purpose of Meeting:*                     Commission Staff is hosting a technical meeting to discuss: (1) Our regulatory (licensing) process; (2) the recommended alternative in the draft environmental assessment issued on June 29, 2017 for the proposed Demopolis Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project; and (3) comments on the US Fish and Wildlife Service's draft biological opinion for the project.                

e. A summary of the meeting will be prepared and filed in the Commission's public file for the project.

g. All local, state, and federal agencies, Indian tribes, and other interested parties are invited to participate by phone. Please call Sarah Salazar at (202) 502-6863 by January 3, 2018, to RSVP and to receive specific instructions on how to participate.

Dated: December 22, 2017.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2017-28325 Filed 1-2-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
EX PARTE Kevin J. WALKER

CR-15-1437

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 9, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Ledarius Kardi SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D16-4925

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 14, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
••/•••;BPORTATIO N ; •;..;-: T OpFRATiCr' o i ? 'A N ? S ^ 1-3 0 Septembe r

27 , 201 1

Departmen t

of Transportatio n Attn : Denni s DeVan y Washington , D C Re : Essentia l Ai r

Servic e a t Kalaupapa , Moloka'i , Hawai' i "Answe r t o Pacifi c Wings ' Petitio n for Reconsideration " I amwritin g thi s lette r

i n support

of Schuma n Aviatio n Compan y Ltd . db aMakan i Kai An - Charter s that

currentl y service s th e Kalaupap asettlement . A s aresiden t o f th e settlemen t

for th e pas t 7 year s I appreciat e an y ai r carrie r that offer s friendly , convenien t servic e at

areasonabl e pric e an dMakan i Kai Ai r Charter s doe s thi s bette r

tha n th e previou s ai r

carrier . Therefore , I d o no t support Pacifi c Wing s petitio n for reconsideration . Than k

yo u fo r you r attentio n t o thi s matter . Sincerely , Eri c K . Brow n P.O . Bo x 11 7 Kalaupapa , H I 9674 2

=2* 1
Exhibit 4(e)


 


PROTECTIVE LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY
• {P. O. BOX 10648 • BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA

35202-0648}


 


NET AMOUNT AT RISK FEE ENDORSEMENT


FOR


VARIABLE ANNUITY DEATH BENEFIT RIDERS


 


We are adding the following
provisions to the Variable Annuity Death Benefit Rider attached to your
Contract:


 


Benefit
Cost - The cost for the death benefit is based on its
Net Amount at Risk. Net Amount at Risk is defined as the amount by which the
death benefit exceeds the Contract Value.


 


Monthly
Fee - Once each month beginning with the 13th
month after the Effective Date and continuing as long as the Variable Annuity
Death Benefit Rider is in force, we will calculate the fee for the death
benefit and deduct that amount from the Contract Value. The monthly fee is calculated
as of the end of the Valuation Period that includes the same day of the month
as the Effective Date, or the last Valuation Period of the month if that date
does not occur during the month for which the fee is being calculated. The fee
is deducted from the Contract Value as of the next Valuation Period.


 


Calculating
the Monthly Fee - We calculate the monthly fee by
first dividing the Net Amount at Risk by 1000, and multiplying that number by a
NAR factor that is based on the oldest Owner’s Age and gender as shown in the
table on the following page.


 


Monthly Fee  =  NAR/1000 x f , where


 


NAR  =  is
the Net Amount at Risk as of the calculation date; and


f   =  is the Net Amount at Risk factor.


 


The monthly fee will vary as a
result of fluctuations in the value of the death benefit and Contract Value, as
well as Age based increases in the Net Amount at Risk factor. The monthly fee
will be $0 anytime the death benefit equals the Contract Value as of the
Valuation Period during which the monthly fee is calculated.


 


Deducting
the Monthly Fee - We will deduct the monthly fee as of
the Valuation Period immediately following the Valuation Period during which it
was calculated. The monthly fee will be deducted pro rata from the Allocation
Options in the same proportion that the value of the Allocation Option bears to
the total Contract Value. We will not assess any applicable surrender charge on
these deductions and the deductions will not reduce any penalty free surrender
amount available under the Contract.


 


Signed for the Company and made
a part of the Contract as of the Effective Date.


 


PROTECTIVE LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE
COMPANY


 


	
  

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  { Secretary }

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
					



 


1
Aubry FREEMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D17-1208

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed October 10, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

DAUGHERTY RESOURCES, INC.
COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
(United States Dollars)
Unaudited


         The table below presents information necessary for the computation of
loss per share of the common stock, on both a primary and fully diluted basis,
for the six months ended June 30, 1999 and 1998, and the years ended December
31, 1998, 1997 and 1996. The computations below reflect the 1 for 5 Reverse
Stock Split effective June 30, 1998.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                         ----------------
                                              JUNE 30                           YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31
                                              -------                           ----------------------

                                        1999           1998             1998             1997              1996
                                        ----           ----             ----             ----              ----

<S>                                 <C>             <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>
Net loss applicable to share of
Common Stock and Common

Stock equivalents                   $   177,509     $  (423,650)     $  (902,319)     $(1,405,829)     $  (734,605)

Average number of shares of
Common Stock Outstanding              2,272,782       1,907,050        2,035,188        1,831,926        1,610,168

Common Stock equivalents              1,514,134       1,455,404        1,448,355        1,353,244          283,293

Total shares of Common Stock

and Common Stock equivalents          3,786,916       3,362,458        3,483,543        3,185,170        1,893,461

Primary loss per share of
Common Stock                        $       .08     $      (.22)     $      (.44)     $      (.77)     $      (.46)

Fully diluted loss per share of     $       .05     $      (.13)     $      (.26)     $      (.44)     $      (.39)
Common Stock
</TABLE>

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

         During periods when the Company incurred net losses, Common Stock
equivalents are considered anti-dilutive.


                                       iv
Michael Conrad BROWNING v. STATE

CR-15-1242

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 9, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report of Golf Two, Inc. a Delaware corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
David Bennett, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Golf Two, Inc., and will be retained by Golf Two, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




/s/ David Bennett
--------------------------
David Bennett
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
August 11, 2004
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the annual report of Veterans in Packaging, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward J. Peplinski, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that:  1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date:  May 13, 2011 By: /s/ Edward J. Peplinski Edward J. Peplinski  Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
[Cite as State ex rel. Sizemore v. Ohio Veterinary Med. Licensing Bd., 132 Ohio St.3d 296, 2012-Ohio-2725.]

T HE S TATE EX REL . S IZEMORE , A PPELLANT , v. O HIO V ETERINARY M EDICAL L ICENSING B OARD , A PPELLEE . [Cite as State ex rel. Sizemore v. Ohio Veterinary Med. Licensing Bd., 132 Ohio St.3d 296, 2012-Ohio-2725.] Mandamus—Extraordinary relief not ava ilable when object sought has been achieved by other means—Relator had adequate remedy in form of motion for contempt against agency for a lleged violation of court mandate. (No. 2012-0176—Submitted June 6, 2012—Decided June 21, 2012.)
A PPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 11AP-298, 2012-Ohio-63.

__________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the c ourt of appeals denying the request by appellant, Terrie Sizemore, D.V.M., a ve terinarian, for a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, the Ohio Veterinary Medical Licensing Board, to reissue a March 2, 2007 adjudication order finding her guilty of misconduct and imposing fines. Sizemore contends that the original order was not in compliance with R.C. 119.09, preventing her from pursuing an appeal. {¶ 2} Sizemore is not entitled to the requested extraordinary relief, because the objective of her administrative appeal—to reverse the board’s finding of misconduct and imposition of fines—has been achieved with the board’s dismissal of the charges against her. See State ex rel. Sawyer v. Cendroski , 118 Ohio St.3d 50, 2008-Ohio-1771, 885 N.E.2d 938, ¶ 8 (mandamus claim is moot when its objective has been obtained). {¶ 3} Nor did the board have any duty to reissue its prior adjudication order finding Sizemore guilty of misconduc t. Instead, as the court of appealsS UPREME C OURT OF O HIO

2 properly held, the board has “the inherent power to dismiss charges against an
individual who has had cla ims of misconduct levied against her or him.” State ex rel. Sizemore v. Ohio Veterinary Med. Bd., 10th Dist. No. 11AP-298, 2012-Ohio63, at ¶ 13. The remand orders of the court of appeals and the common pleas court did not prevent the board from dismissing the charges. See State ex rel.
Jelinek v. Schneider , 127 Ohio St.3d 332, 2010-Ohio-5986, 939 N.E.2d 847, ¶ 14 (court that issued mandate is in the best position to interpret it). {¶ 4} Finally, in the absence of a patent and unambiguous lack of jurisdiction, Sizemore has an adequate remedy by way of a motion for contempt to raise her claim that the board violated the court of appeals’ mandate to reissue its adjudication order. See Dzina v. Celebrezze , 108 Ohio St.3d 385, 2006-Ohio1195, 843 N.E.2d 1202, ¶ 14 (“the use of extraordinary relief to enforce a judgment is not widespread, because of the availability of other means of enforcement, e.g., motion for contempt”). 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.

__________________ Terrie Sizemore, pro se. Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Walter J. McNamara, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

______________________
Exhibit 31.1
 Certification of Chief Executive Officer  Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
      (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 consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and
the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;(c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and(d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation 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 other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
  /s/ William S. Daugherty
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,455]

      ( print page 12904)    
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on March 3, 2009 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Graphic Visual Solutions, Inc., Greensboro, North Carolina.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of March 2009.

Richard Church,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-6536 Filed 3-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         296,775
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  594,798
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               891,573
<PP&E>                                      17,107,551
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,999,124
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,234,338
<BONDS>                                      1,773,121
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    21,319,145
<OTHER-SE>                                 (8,327,480)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                17,999,124
<SALES>                                        539,611
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               539,611
<CGS>                                          403,406
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  403,406
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               620,674
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              86,944
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                               (508,267)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,025,126)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.45)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.27)


</TABLE>
---

Exhibit 99.3

COGNOS INCORPORATED

CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly
Report of Cognos Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
May 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Tom Manley, Senior Vice President Finance & Administration and
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
knowledge:

(1)                 The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(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 Company.

|              |  |                                                                                                                                                      
|------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|July 11, 2003 |  | /s/ Tom Manley                                                                                                                                       
|              |  |                                                                                                                                                      
|Date          |  | Tom Manley, 
Senior Vice President, Finance & Administration 
and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Chief 
Accounting Officer)

71