alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk November 24, 2010

1117 

# Order

November 24, 2010

141291

HOWARD LINDEN, Conservator of the Estate of INDIA THOMAS, a Minor Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 141291
COA: 296799 Wayne CC: 07-720169-NH
ST. JOHN HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER, and ST. JO HN HEALTH d/b/a ST. JOHN HEALTH SYSTEM, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 8, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should now be reviewed by this Court.

K ELLY 

### , C.J., and H ATHAWAY 

### , J., would grant leave to appeal.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7613

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

FRANCINA MARIA DAVIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (CR-89-68, CA-99-3094-7-20)

Submitted: May 11, 2000 Decided: May 17, 2000

Before MURNAGHAN, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Francina Maria Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Arthur Bradley Parham, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Francina Maria Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying her motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Davis, Nos. CR-89-68; CA99-3094-7-20 (D.S.C. Sept. 22, 1999). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earthquakes

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

Filters

              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)
              - california(13)
              - colorado(3)
              - (-)massachusetts(1)
              - virginia(1)
              - washington(1)
              - wyoming(1)

## By Year

              - 2024(3)
              - (-)2023(1)

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

staff profileClaudia Flores
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earthquakes

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

Filters

              - (-)science_science(3)
              - products_maps(2)
              - products_publications(5)
              - news_news-149248(1)
              - news_news-149250(1)

## By Location

              - alabama(3)
              - alaska(17)
              - american samoa(2)
              - arizona(2)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(68)
              - colorado(3)
              - connecticut(1)
              - delaware(3)
              - district of columbia(3)
              - florida(2)
              - georgia(4)
              - guam(2)
              - hawaii(21)
              - idaho(5)
              - illinois(1)
              - indiana(2)
              - iowa(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - louisiana(2)
              - maine(3)
              - maryland(4)
              - massachusetts(2)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - mississippi(2)
              - missouri(2)
              - montana(1)
              - nebraska(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - new hampshire(1)
              - new jersey(4)
              - new mexico(1)
              - new york(4)
              - (-)north carolina(3)
              - north dakota(1)
              - ohio(1)
              - oklahoma(2)
              - oregon(18)
              - pennsylvania(4)
              - puerto rico(12)
              - rhode island(2)
              - south carolina(4)
              - south dakota(1)
              - tennessee(3)
              - texas(2)
              - u.s. virgin islands(3)
              - utah(4)
              - vermont(1)
              - virginia(7)
              - washington(28)
              - west virginia(2)
              - wisconsin(1)
              - wyoming(2)

## By Year

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

Program        June 26, 2019        Information by Region - North Carolina

Research        April 12, 2016        Geologic Hazards and Catastrophic Events

Project        September 27, 2018        Piedmont and Blue Ridge Project
Exhibit 99.1


OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

Re: Impac CMB Trust Series 2003-5, Collateralized Asset-Backed
Bonds, Series 2003-5

I, Mario R. Fegan, Jr., hereby certify that I am the Vice President,
Master Servicing, of Impac Funding Corporation.  I further certify,
with respect to the Servicing Agreement, as Master Servicer, the
following:

1. A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the
preceding calendar year and of its performance under the Servicing
Agreement has been made under my supervision;

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master
Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Servicing
Agreement for such year;

3. A review of the activities of each Subservicer during the
Subservicer's most recently ended fiscal year on or prior to
December 31, 2003 and its performance under its Subservicing
Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

4. To the best of my knowledge, based on my review and the
certification of an officer of each Subservicer, each Subservicer
has performed and fulfilled its duties, responsibilities and obligations
under the Servicing Agreement and its Subservicing Agreement in all
material respects throughout the year.



IMPAC FUNDING CORPORATION,
as Master Servicer

By:   /s/ Mario R. Fegan, Jr.
Name: Mario R. Fegan, Jr.
Title:  Vice President, Master Servicing
NOTE: This orderis nonprecedential. 

# Winiteb**~tate5** 

# ([ourtof**~penI5** 

# for tbe jf 

# ehernI ([irruit

G. DAVID JANG, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, 

### v. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, AND 

### SCIMED LIFE SYSTEMS, INC., Defendants-Appellees.
2011·1633 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in case no. 05·CV·0426, Judge Virginia A. Phillips. 

### ONMOTION

ORDER Boston Scientific Corporation and Scimed Life Systems, Inc. move without opposition for an extension of time, until January 26, 2012, to file its response brief, and for an extension of time, until February 13, 2012, for G. David Jang, M.D. to file his reply brief.JANG v. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC Uponconsideration thereof, IT Is ORDEREDTHAT: The motion is granted.


## DEC 12 2011 Date

cc: Douglas E. Lumish, Esq. MatthewM. Wolf, Esq. s21 FOR THE COURT lsI Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk 2

U.

## couJlk~p£ALSfOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 

# D£C 12,

## lOU

JANHORSALY ClERK
Brandon EDWARDS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-3438

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 7, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 23**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMMonarch Community Bancorp, Inc.
Michael J. MARTIN, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D17-3655

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

October 31, 2018 Rehearing Denied November 15, 2018

Michael J. Martin, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Kaitlin Weiss, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

DENIED .

Osterhaus and Winsor, JJ., concur; Wolf, J., dissents with opinion.

I would grant the petition for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. *See**Andujar-Ruiz v. State* , 205 So.3d 803 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (holding appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to argue trial court's instruction on duty to retreat constituted fundamental error).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OLATEJU OLU OLABANJI, AKA Teju O. 

Aabanji, AKA Chris Mark Chappell, AKA 

Trevor Dishon, AKA Stephen Frye, AKA 

Thomas Jackson, AKA Tim Jackson, AKA 

Robert Kajimoto, AKA Myron Obrasnialc, 

AKA Myron Obrunsniak, AKA Olateju 

Olabanji, AKA Olatico Olabanji, AKA Teju 

O. Olabanji, AKA Teju O. Olabans, AKA 

John O. Oshin, AKA TJ, AKA Carlos 

Usallan, AKA “TJ”,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 14-71511

Agency No. A076-603-785

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 26, 2016**

Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAY 2 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 14-71511

Olateju Olu Olabanji, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for review of 

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his second motion to 

reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. 

We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. 

Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and 

dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Olabanji’s second motion to 

reopen because it was untimely and number-barred, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), 

and he failed to establish that he qualified for an exception to the time and 

numerical limits for filing a motion to reopen, see Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 

988, 996 (9th Cir. 2008) (explaining the BIA can deny a motion to reopen based on 

changed country conditions for failure to establish prima facie eligibility for the 

relief sought); Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1034 (9th Cir. 2014) (“[a] 

government does not acquiesce in the torture of its citizens merely because it is 

aware of torture but powerless to stop it”) (internal quotation and citation omitted). 

We reject Olabanji’s contentions that the BIA failed to consider evidence and 

analyze his claim properly. See Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 990 (the BIA adequately 

considered the evidence and sufficiently announced its decision).
3 14-71511

Finally, we lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s refusal to reopen 

proceedings sua sponte. See Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 

(9th Cir. 2011).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

May 9, 2006

ERRATA

Appeal No. 05-5025, -5029

PAYMASTER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., V U.S.

Decided: May 5, 2006 Non-Precedential Opinion

Please make the following change:

This opinion is now non-precedential.
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 Annual Report Amendment No. 1 of Capital Reserve Canada Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James Baker, Principal Executive Officerof the Company, certify, 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 results of operations of the Company.







By:/s/ James Baker

Name: James Baker



Title:

Principal Executive Officer

Date:

September 30, 2005
Michael W. BOND, Appellant, v. Lauren B. BOND, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1808

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed October 19, 2018

Michael W. Bond, pro se.

Linda H. Fried of Fried & Fried, P.A., Fort Myers, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, CASANUEVA, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earthquakes

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

Filters

              - science_education(22)
              - science_faqs(118)
              - science_science(412)
              - products_data(220)
              - products_maps(149)
              - products_publications(5604)
              - products_software(48)
              - products_web_tools(35)
              - multimedia_audio(122)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(105)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(17)
              - multimedia_image(1087)
              - multimedia_image-141769(48)
              - multimedia_image-141770(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(861)
              - multimedia_image-141772(15)
              - multimedia_image-141774(9)
              - multimedia_image-141775(100)
              - multimedia_image-141776(49)
              - multimedia_image-204460(1)
              - multimedia_image-207195(3)
              - multimedia_slideshow(13)
              - multimedia_video(384)
              - multimedia_video-149194(127)
              - multimedia_video-149195(159)
              - multimedia_video-149196(31)
              - multimedia_video-149197(7)
              - multimedia_video-149198(23)
              - multimedia_video-149225(1)
              - documents_file(28)
              - (-)documents_file-149213(1)
              - documents_file-149214(1)
              - documents_file-149217(2)
              - documents_file-149218(1)
              - documents_file-149220(23)
              - news_news-149245(54)
              - news_news-149246(15)
              - news_news-149247(1)
              - news_news-149248(46)
              - news_news-149249(13)
              - news_news-149250(101)
              - news_newsletters(15)
              - news_other_news(254)
              - connect_locations(3)
              - connect_social_media(9)
              - connect_staff_profiles(160)
              - other_basic-37(7)
              - other_basic-42(111)

## By Location

## By Year

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

Policy and Directives        December 30, 2015        Recommendations from NEPEC on operational earthquake forecasting
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-4464

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus GEORGE THOMAS CABEL, a/k/a PY, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District Judge. (CR-97-173) Submitted: April 29, 1999 Decided: May 5, 1999 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James B. Craven, III, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, Paul Alexander Weinman, Assistant United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: George Thomas Cabel appeals his conviction and sentence after a jury trial for one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994). Cabel claims on appealthat the district court erred by admitting testimony of coconspirators who were promised assistance from the Government if their testimony was helpful in Cabel’s prosecution, by applying a four-level enhancement under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B.1.1(a) (1997) for being an organizer or leader of five or more persons, by applying a two-level enhancement under USSG § 2D1.1(b) for possession of a firearm in the commission of the conspiracy, in determining that the sentencing disparity between crack and cocaine is constitutional, and in holding that his conviction was supported by sufficient evidence. We find that the court did not clearly err on any of the sentencing issues, that the court did not plainly err in admitting the testimony of Cabel’s co-conspirators, that the crack to cocaine ratio is constitutional, see United States v. D’Anjou , 16 F.3d 604 (4th Cir. 1994), and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction, see Glasser v. United States , 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). Cabel filed a motion to file a pro se supplemental brief. We grant the motion. However, we find the claims raised to be either duplicative of the formal brief, frivolous and without merit, or ineffective assistance of counsel issues, which may not be raised3 on direct appeal because ineffective assistance does not appear conclusively from the record. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Edwin Ray PARKER and Kenneth Brad Ott v. The SENATE OF THE STATE of Louisiana, The Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, and the State of Louisiana

NO. 2018-C-0546

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 15, 2018

Denied.

WEIMER, J., would grant.

HUGHES, J., would grant.

GENOVESE, J., would grant.
Order entered April 24, 2019

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 01184

- CV

RODNEY DRAUGHON, Appellant

V.

JOYCIE JOHNSON, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court A t Law No. 1

Kaufman County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 99751

- CC



### O RDER

Before the Court is appellant’s April 23, 2019 motion for an extension of time to file his

reply brief. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to file a reply brief to May 21, 2019

.

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE
**Exhibit 32.1**
 
 **STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF**
 **KERYX BIOPHARMACEUTICALS, INC.**
 **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 Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Michael S. Weiss, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my 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 Company.
 
 Date: November 11, 2004

/s/ Michael S. WeissMichael S. Weiss
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
 THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002 
 The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of Gladstone Commercial Corporation (the Company),
hereby certifies on the date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350(a), as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2004 as amended by Amendment No. 2 to Form 10-K (Form 10-K), filed concurrently herewith by the Company, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and that the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 
 A signed original 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 Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request. 
 Dated: October 19, 2005 
 /s/ David GladstoneDavid GladstoneChief Executive Officer
Andrew RAMKISSOON, Appellant, v. GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC; Bank of America NA; Danielle Sinanen; and United States of America, Appellees.

Case No. 2D18-1147

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed December 5, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 19, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 13, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1060 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-819, K2025-819.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-30193 Filed 12-18-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P