alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| Form | Registration No. | Purpose                                                                                    |
|------|------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| S-8  | 333-164333       | 2010 Long-Term Incentive Plan                                                              |
| S-3  | 333-163233       | Registration of debt securities, common stock, preferred stock, warrants, and guarantees   |
| S-8  | 333-141186       | 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan                                                              |
| S-3  | 333-143615       | Registration of convertible notes, guarantees and common stock                             |
| S-3  | 333-134409       | Registration of convertible notes, guarantees and common stock                             |
| S-8  | 333-107913       | ArvinMeritor, Inc. Savings Plan                                                            |
| S-8  | 333-123103       | ArvinMeritor, Inc. Hourly Employees Saving Plan                                            |
| S-3  | 333-58760        | Registration of debt securities                                                            |
| S-8  | 333-49610        | 1997 Long-Term Incentives Plan                                                             |
| S-3  | 333-43118        | ArvinMeritor, Inc. 1988 Stock Benefit Plan                                                 |
| S-3  | 333-43116        | ArvinMeritor, Inc. 1998 Stock Benefit Plan                                                 |
| S-3  | 333-43112        | ArvinMeritor, Inc. Employee Stock Benefit Plan                                             |
| S-8  | 333-42012        | Employee Stock Benefit Plan, 1988 Stock Benefit Plan, and 1998 Employee Stock Benefit Plan |

| /s/    | DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |
|-----------------------|---------------------------|
|                  | DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |

----
CAMSOFT DATA SYSTEMS, INC. v. SOUTHERN ELECTRONICS SUPPLY, INC. and Active Solutions, LLC

NO. 2018-02018

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 11, 2019

Denied.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00401

- CR

Robert Wayne Westbrook

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 297th District Court

o f Tarr ant County (1375130D )

October 30 , 2014

P er C uriam

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appea l is dismissed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM
NATIONAL SURGICAL CENTERS OF AMERICA, LLC and Prospira Florida, LLC, Appellants, v. Denise HARTSOOK, Appellee.

No. 4D18-1650

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 13, 2018]

Mark E. Zelek, Dalisi O. Carrasco and Carlotta J. Roos of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Miami, for appellants.

Cathleen Scott of Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A., Jupiter, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Warner, May and Conner, JJ., concur.
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-10664

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JORGE ERASMO SANCHEZ-GUEVARA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:09-CR-10-1

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge Erasmo

Sanchez-Guevara has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Sanchez-Guevara

has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s

brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 12, 2010

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

Case: 09-10664 Document: 00511027413 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/12/2010
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 248 (Friday, December 27, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 105640]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31001]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

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 27, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 17, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1118 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-897, K2025-898.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-31001 Filed 12-26-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
## Court of Appeals of the State of Geo rgia
ATLA NTA,

_________________ _ The Court of

Appeals hereby passes

the followi

ng order: A14A2099. PAUL JOHNSON v. THE STATE. Paul John son was c onvicted of murder. Aft er the superior cour t denied his motion for new trial, Johnson appea l ed to this Co urt. Un der our Co nstitution, however, th e Su pre me Co urt has app ell ate jur is di cti on ov er “[ a]ll cases in w hich a sent ence of death w as im posed or could be im

posed.” S ee Ga. Const. of 1983, Art
. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (8). Bec aus e a p ena lt y of d eat h ca n b e imp os ed f or t he c rime of murder, jurisdic tionis proper i n the Supre me C ourt. Se e OCGA § 17-10-30 (

b); Neal v. State , 290 Ga. 563, 572 (72 2 SE2d 765) (2012) (H unstein, C. J., concurring); see also State v. T

hornton , 253 Ga. 524 ( 322 SE2d 711) (1984) (directing th is Court to transfer “all cases in which either a sentence of death or of life imprisonment has been imposed upon convicti on o f mur der”). Accordingly, this appea l is hereby TRANS FERRE D to the S uprem e Court fo r disposition
. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Offi

ce, Atlant a,_______________

___ I certify t hat the abo ve is a t

rue extract f

rom the minutes of the Court

of Appeals

of Georgia. Witness my signa ture and the seal of said co urt hereto aff

ixed the day and year last above writt

en. , Clerk. 07/31/2014 July 31, 2014
Kenneth Carl GUY, Appellant, v. PLAZA HOME MORTGAGE, INC., Appellee.

No. 4D17-3335

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 25, 2018]

Kenneth Carl Guy, Fort Lauderdale, pro se.

Laura H. Howard of The Solomon Law Group, P.A., Tampa, for appellee.

**ON MOTION TO CORRECT THE RECORD**

Per Curiam.

In this appeal from a foreclosure judgment, the pro se appellant moves to correct the record, asserting that the final judgment of foreclosure's electronic date and time stamp precedes the actual time of entry of the judgment. While we deny relief, we write to disapprove of a practice in the Broward County Clerk's office.

The record in this case contains a summary final judgment. The summary judgment hearing was held on September 27, 2017, at 1:30 p.m., but the judgment's electronic stamp indicates that it was filed with the Broward County Clerk on September 27, 2017, at 8:35 a.m., nearly five hours earlier.

Appellee and the Broward County Clerk both filed responses to appellant's motion. The Clerk's response states that the time stamp reflects the time of day that the Clerk scanned the document for processing to the electronic case management system. The Clerk does not explain why the scanning would precede the entry of the judgment.

Appellee's response indicates that counsel for appellee spoke to personnel in the Broward County Clerk's Foreclosure Department, who explained that the Clerk's office usually does not receive dispositions on the date of their entry. Accordingly, when the Clerk's office receives the disposition, it changes the date of filing to coincide with the date of entry of the final judgment. In other words, the date is backdated, but the time reflects the actual time of scanning, resulting in an electronic stamp that appears to precede the actual entry of the judgment.

We write to express our disapproval of the practice of the backdating of judgments for docketing purposes. It can *281cause, at best, confusion, and at worst, a loss of appellate rights. Rendition of an order occurs "when a signed, written order is filed with the clerk of the lower tribunal." Fla. R. App. P. 9.020(i). Thus, the date that the clerk's office receives an order or judgment is the date of rendition.

The time for appeal runs from the date of rendition, not the date the judgment is signed. *See* Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b). By backdating the electronic filing stamp, the clerk changes the rendition date, possibly to the prejudice of an appellant.

In this case, appellant's appellate rights were not affected, and so his January 9, 2018, motion to correct the record is denied as to issues I and IV regarding the backdating of court orders. We nevertheless disapprove of this practice as it is inconsistent with the appellate rules.

Warner, Gross and Levine, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 31.2
                                  CERTIFICATION

I Alvin Brovenick, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of IBX Group, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made know to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this annual report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this Annual
Report (the "Evaluation Date");

(c) Presented in this Annual Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls 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 recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors:

(a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and 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 have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this Annual
Report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly 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 30, 2004             /s/ Alvin Brovenick
                                 Alvin Brovenick, Acting Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2

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 Digital Network International Alliance, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the "Report"), I, Eppie Wong, CFO and a director 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:

> 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's
> financial position and results of operations.

/s/Eppie Wong



Eppie Wong,

 CFO and a director

September 1, 2006
Exhibit 31.1

            PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, April L. Marino, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Pinecrest
Services, Inc.;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statement made, in light of the circumstances under which statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small
business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4.    The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
small business issuer and have:

      (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 small business issuer,
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) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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

      (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.    The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent function):

      (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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.

                                 /s/ April L. Marino
DATE: August 2, 2004           ____________________________________________
                               April L. Marino, Principal Executive Officer
**Exhibit 8.1**

 

**LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES**

 
| **Name of  Subsidiary**                                    |   | **Jurisdiction of Organization** |
|------------------------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------|
|                                                       |   |                             |
| Subsidiaries  of the Registrant:                           |   |                             |
| China Unicom Corporation Limited                           |   | People’s  Republic of China |
| Unicom New Century Telecommunications  Corporation Limited |   | People’s Republic  of China |
| Unicom New World (BVI) Limited                             |   | British  Virgin Islands          |
|                                                       |   |                             |
| Subsidiary  of Unicom New World (BVI) Limited:             |   |                             |
| Unicom New World Telecommunications  Corporation Limited   |   | People’s  Republic of China |

 

----
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                            Certificate 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 WGNB Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, L. Leighton Alston,
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of 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.
                                                                  August 8, 2002

/s/ L. Leighton Alston
--------------------------------------
L. Leighton Alston
President, Chief Executive Officer and
Director (Principal Executive Officer)
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT RAY VINCENT THOMAS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-2322 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed August 22, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Collier County; James R. Shenko, Judge. Ray Vincent Thomas, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Logan v. State, 846 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 2003); Bizzell v. State, 912 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Harris v. State, 818 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002).

BLACK, SALARIO, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CFO

                                  Exhibit 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Inyx, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB/A for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Rima Goldshmidt,
Vice President of Finance and Acting Chief Financial Officer of the small
business issuer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:

      (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 small
business issuer.



/s/ Rima Goldshmidt
-------------------
Rima Goldshmidt
Vice President of Finance and Acting Chief Financial Officer


April 8, 2005
-----------------
Date
Javier FERNANDEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1965

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 16, 2019.

The Law Office of Adam K. Goodman, PLLC, and Adam K. Goodman, for appellant.

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, and Marlon J. Weiss, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, C.J., and LOGUE and SCALES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

*225Affirmed. *See* *Bouters v. State*, 659 So.2d 235 (Fla. 1995) (holding that the "substantial emotional distress" element of stalking requires application of an objective, reasonable-person standard); *Pallas v. State*, 636 So.2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) ; *T.B. v. State*, 990 So.2d 651 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) ; *D.L.D. v. State*, 815 So.2d 746 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) ; *McMath v. Biernacki*, 776 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). *See also* *McKinnon v. State*, 712 So.2d 1259, 1260-61 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (holding that the "harassment" element of crime of stalking requires State to prove defendant's acts *caused* substantial emotional distress, not that defendant *intended to cause* substantial emotional distress); *Seese v. State*, 955 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (noting distinction between "legal malice" (wrongfully, intentionally, without legal justification or excuse) and "actual malice" (ill will, hatred, spite, or evil intent), and holding that section 784.08(4) requires proof of legal malice); Fla. Std. J. Inst. 8.7(b) (Crim.) (providing: " 'Maliciously' means wrongfully, intentionally, and without legal justification or excuse").
Nicholas CONEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-1712

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

October 18, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Judy Ann Jean KEETER, et al., Appellant, v. The BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FICA the Bank of New York, as Trustee for the Certificateholders of CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2006-0A11, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-0A11; Unknown Tenant in Possession of the Subject Property, Appellees.

No. 1D18-3554

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.