alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed May 25, 2016.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D15-2189

Lower Tribunal No. 13-3741

________________



### Alberto Soler

, Appellant,

vs.



### Ally Bank, et al.

, Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose M.

Rodriguez

, Judge.

Alberto Soler, in proper person.

Kelley Kronenberg, and David E. Hicks (Tampa), for appellee Ally Bank

.

Before ROTHENBERG, LAGOA, and SALTER, JJ.

ROTHENBERG, J.

Alberto Soler appeals from a final order denying as untimely filed hismotion for relief from judgment filed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure

1.540(b)(1). As the record before this Court demonstrates that the motion was

timely filed, we reverse the order under review and remand for the trial court to

address the motion o n its merits.

Reversed and remanded.

2
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Daniel G. Welch, Chief Executive Officer of InterMune, Inc. (the
Company), and John C. Hodgman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



|1. | The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Periodic
Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 8th day of March, 2011.



|                        |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|                        |  |  |  |                        
|                        |  | 
|/s/ Daniel G. Welch     |  |  |  | /s/ John C. Hodgman    
|Daniel G. Welch         |  |  |  | John C. Hodgman        
|Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies
the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of InterMune, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
**Exhibit 31.2****ANNUAL COMPLIANCE REPORT**I, William H. Hall, being an officer of U.S. Bank Trust National Association, the Trustee in respect of the USAutos Series 2004-1 Trust (the "Trust"), certify that: 1. Based on my knowledge, the distribution information required to be provided to the Depositor or the certificateholders by the Trustee under the pooling and servicing or similar agreement for inclusion in this annual report is included in this report; 2. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the Trustee under the pooling and servicing or similar agreement and based on my knowledge, except as disclosed in this annual report, the Trustee has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and Date: March 17, 2010 /s/ William H. Hall -------------------------------- William H. Hall, Vice President
CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Byron Cox, Chief Financial Officer of Fairchild International Corporation (the "Company"), hereby 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:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, and to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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.

/s/ Byron Cox
________________________________
Byron Cox
Secretary, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer
August 12, 2004





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-QSB to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-QSB), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
**Exhibit 31.2**
**Certification**
     I, John L. Finlayson, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Susquehanna Media Co., “the Registrant”;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact 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 the periodcovered by this annual report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annualreport;
     4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have:
     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material informationrelating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is beingprepared;
     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as ofa date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and
     c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
     5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent function):
     a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which couldadversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial dataand have identified for the Registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls;and
     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the Registrant’s internal controls; and
     6. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annual reportwhether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that couldsignificantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.     Date: March 31, 2005 /s/ John L. Finlayson       John L. Finlayson   Chief Financial Officer  
78
AEGIS CONSTRUCTION, INC. v. LULING LIVING CENTER, LLC

NO. 2018-CC-0364

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 20, 2018

Denied.
Exh.4.1.Q3






Exhibit 4.1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          88,373
<SECURITIES>                                    49,897
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,258
<ALLOWANCES>                                       802
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               147,470
<PP&E>                                           5,456
<DEPRECIATION>                                     884
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 152,541
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,270
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           313
<OTHER-SE>                                     135,215
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   152,541
<SALES>                                         20,674
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,674
<CGS>                                            3,491
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,491
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                36,296
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 159
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (17,816)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (17,816)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (17,816)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.46)


</TABLE>
October 2, 2015

Mr. Greg Hesser

4843 North Willamette Blvd

Portland, OR 97203

Dear Mr. Hesser:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from 

sections of part 49 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we 

cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We received your June 9, 2015, exemption request filed in Docket No. FAA−2015−2858, but 

we are unable to process your request any further. Your petition does not comply with the 

requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must 

send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosures
3
4
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to

18 U.S.C.
Section 1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned,
the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company), each hereby certifies that to his knowledge on the date hereof:



|(a) | The Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                       |  |                        
|---------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 9, 2009 |  | /s/ William L. Hunter  
|                       |  | William L. Hunter, M.D.
|                       |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                       | 
|Date: November 9, 2009 |  | /s/ K. Thomas Bailey   
|                       |  | K. Thomas Bailey       
|                       |  | Chief Financial Officer
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2940 

To suspend temporarily the duty on poly(2,2′-bis(4-cyanatophenyl)propane). 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 8, 2012 

Mr. MENENDEZ introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on poly(2,2′-bis(4- 

cyanatophenyl)propane). 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. POLY(2,2′-BIS(4-CYANATOPHENYL)PROPANE). 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 poly(2,2′-bis(4- 

cyanatophenyl)propane) (CAS 

No. 25722–66–1) (provided 

for in subheading 

2929.10.55) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2940 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 16, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00704

- CR

Lissette FUENTES

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, T exas

Trial Court No. 16

- CRS

- 318 The Honorable Everardo Garcia, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The trial court imposed sentence on June 12, 2018. Because appellant timely filed a motion for new trial on July 11, 2018, the notice of appeal was due to be filed on September 10,

2018. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.2(a). A notice of appeal was not filed until September 27, 2018, and appellant did not timely file a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal. See

id. R. 26.3.

We therefore ORDER appellant to file a written response in this court on or befor e Novem ber 15, 2018 showing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

See Olivo v. State , 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (holding that timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke court of appeals ’ j urisdiction). If appellant fails to satisfactorily respond within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction

. If a supplemental clerk ’ s record is required to show jurisdiction, appellant must ask the trial court clerk to prep are one and must notify the clerk of this court that such a request was made. All deadlines in this matter are suspended until further order of the court.

We order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on all counsel and the court

report er.

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 16th day of October, 2018

.

___________________________________ K eith E. H ott le

Cl erk of Court
ATTACHMENT A 

2002 Attainment Inventory and 

2012 and 2014 Projected Inventories 

(Files available on accompanying CD.)
# Official Journal C 46/2007

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 46 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5028 February 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 46

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5028 February 2007

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations, guidelines and opinions |
| | OPINIONS |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2007/C 046/01 | Opinion No 1/2007 on the draft Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) amending Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations, guidelines and opinions

OPINIONS

Court of Auditors

2007/C 046/01

Opinion No 1/2007 on the draft Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) amending Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
FILED 

 U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

 June 13, 2005 

 THOMAS K. KAHN 

 CLERK

 [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-14139

 

D. C. Docket No. 04-20271 CV-PAS

CAROL SUE PERKINS, as personal representative of

the Estate of Harry Glenn Perkins, deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SANDALS RESORTS INTERNATIONAL, LTD.,

a foreign Corporation,

d.b.a. Sandals Royal Bahamin Resorts and Spa,

UNIQUE VACATIONS, INC.,

a Florida corporation,

d.b.a. Sandals Resorts, Inc.,

Defendants-Appellees,

PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DIVE INSTRUCTORS,

 Defendant.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

 

(June 13, 2005)
2

Before DUBINA and WILSON, Circuit Judges, and LAWSON*, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant/Plaintiff appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in

favor of Appellees/Defendants, Sandals Resorts International, Ltd. and Unique

Vacations, Inc., in this negligence action.

We review de novo a district court’s grant of summary judgment. Gerling

Global Reinsurance Corp. of America v. Gallagher, 267 F.3d 1228, 1233-34 (11th

Cir. 2001).

After reviewing the record, reading the parties briefs and having the benefit

of oral argument, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment based

on its well-reasoned order filed on July 15, 2004.

AFFIRMED.

__________________________

*Honorable Hugh Lawson, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Georgia,

sitting by designation.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3230 

To require issuers of long term care insurance to establish third-party review 

processes for disputed claims. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 23, 2012 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To require issuers of long term care insurance to establish 

third-party review processes for disputed claims. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Long Term Care In5 surance Integrity Act of 2012’’. 

6 SEC. 2. LONG TERM CARE INSURANCE DISPUTE RESOLU7 TION REVIEW PROCESS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi9 sion of law, an insurance issuer that offers a long term 

10 care insurance plan shall develop and implement claims 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3230 IS

1 dispute resolution procedures that comply with the re2 quirements of this section that shall be applicable to such 

3 plan. 

4 (b) REQUIREMENT.—A claims dispute resolution pro5 cedure under subsection (a) shall— 

6 (1) be designed to expeditiously resolve disputes 

7 concerning claims under the plan involved; 

8 (2) with respect to such disputes, provide for 

9 the application of one or more alternative means of 

10 dispute resolution involving independent third-party 

11 review under appropriate circumstances by entities 

12 that are mutually acceptable to the issuer and the 

13 enrollee involved, with the decision of such reviewer 

14 being binding on the issuer; and 

15 (3) ensure that an enrollee is eligible to obtain 

16 claims review only to the extent and in the manner 

17 provided for in the applicable insurance contract. 

18 (c) APPEALS.—An enrollee may appeal the decision 

19 of an independent reviewer under subsection (b)(2) to an 

20 appropriate State court as provided for under State law. 

21 (d) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this sec22 tion shall be construed to provide authority for an inde23 pendent third-party reviewer under subsection (b)(2) to 

24 modify the terms of any long term care insurance contract. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EX-99.1



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 Fairchild International Corporation (the "Corporation") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, George Tsafalas, the President and Chief Executive Officer and Byron Cox, the Secretary, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to our knowledge:

(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 Corporation.



George Tsafalas

/s/ George Tsafalas
__________________________
President and Chief Executive
Officer

Byron Cox

/s/ Byron Cox
_________________________
Secretary, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer

May 16, 2003