alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-1473

___________ Joe Brasfield, Sr., * * Appellant, * * v. * * . State of Arkansas; Desha County, * Arkansas; Skippy Leek; Sam Pope; * Leo Bottom; Wayne Bottom Farm, Inc.; * Appeal from the United States E. C. Tatum Farm, Inc.; Fred Pittman * District Court for the Eastern Farm, Inc.; Willie Dean Tatum Farm, * District of Arkansas. Inc.; Marion Gill; Martin Walt; David * Walt; Martin Lee Walt Farm, Inc.; * Glenn Lambert Farm, Inc.; Clyde * Love Farm, Inc.; Don Smith; Joe * Grayson; David Garrett; Wayne Beaty; * Jean Ellington; United States of * America, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: December 30, 1997 Filed: January 14, 1998

___________ Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.TheHo norable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for th e 1 Eastern District of Arkansas. -2- JoeBrasfield, Sr. appeals the district court & s orders dismissing his civil rights 1 compl aint for failure to state a claim. Having carefully reviewed the record and th e partie s & submissions, we agree Brasfield & s complaint fails to state a claim against any of the nam ed defendants. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court

. See8th Cir. R. 47B.
Brasfield & s pending motions are denied as moot. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
# m8532.docx

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 10.7.2017 C(2017) 4991 final T o the notifying party: Subject : Case M.8532 - BLACKSTONE GROUP / SPONDA Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1 )( b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 1 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area 2 Dear Sir or Madam, 1. On 15 June 2017 , the European Commission received notification of a proposed conc entration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which the undertaking Blackstone Group L.P. ("Blackstone", USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation indirect sole control of Sponda Plc (" Sponda ", Finland) by means of a tender offer . 3 2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are: - for Blackstone: global asset manager. It is headquartered in the United States and has offices in Europe and Asia. - for Sponda : a Finnish public real estate investment company that specializes in leasing business premises and developing and owning properties. 3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and of paragraph 6 of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 . 4 4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the internal market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1 )( b) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement . For the Commission
(S igned) Johannes LAITENBERGER Director - General
(1)
OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 ( the ' Merger Regulation ' ). With effect from 1 December 2009, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ( ' TFEU ' ) has introduced certain changes, such as the replacement of ' Community ' by ' Union ' and ' common market ' by ' internal market ' . The terminology of the TFEU will be used throughout this decision.
(2) OJ L 1, 3.1.1994, p. 3 ( the ' EEA Agreement ' ).
(3) Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 200 , 23.06. 2017 , p. 28 .
(4)
OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5 .
1

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER DEEMING DENIED MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER DEEMING DENIED MOTION 

FOR RELIEF FROM 

NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER

Re: Dkt. No. 334

On November 27, 2017, FTC filed a Motion for Relief from Magistrate Judge’s 

Nondispositive Pretrial Order Regarding Qualcomm’s Privilege Assertion. ECF No. 334. 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 72-2, “[i]f no order denying the motion or setting a briefing schedule 

is made within 14 days of filing the motion, the motion shall be deemed denied.” The parties are 

hereby notified that FTC’s motion is deemed denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 8, 2018

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 456 Filed 01/08/18 Page 1 of 1
Latashia BORDEN, Individually and on Behalf of Her Deceased Husband, Kenneth Ancar v. UNITED SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO., W.B. Company, Inc, and Brandon Bonvillain

Kenneth Ray Ancar, Jr., Keina Rai Tompkins, and Krystal Renee Ancar v. United Specialty Insurance Company, Brandon J. Bonvillain, W.B. Company, Inc., Willie Bonvillain, Jr., Josephine Trahan Bonvillain,

Southern Aggregates LLC Delaware, Terrebonne Concrete, LLC, State Farm Mutual Ins. Co., and GEICO Casualty Co.

NO. 2019-CC-0614

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2019

*198Stay denied. Writ denied.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**






In
      connection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bridge Capital
      Holdings for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, I, Daniel P. Myers, President
      and
      Chief Executive Officer of Bridge Capital Holdings, hereby certify pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 that:




1)
            such
                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 such Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Bridge
                Capital Holdings.






Date: 
      August 2, 2007


/s/
      Daniel P. Myers


Daniel
      P.
      Myers


President
      and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.63



July 31, 2003


Mr. Gerald A. Nathe
Chairman of the Board of Directors
Baldwin Technology Company, Inc.
12 Commerce Drive
Shelton, CT 06484

Re:     Commercial revolving and term loans and letters of credit ("Credit
Facility") from Fleet National Bank as Agent, and Wachovia Bank National
Association to Baldwin Americas Corporation, Baldwin Europe Consolidated Inc.
and Baldwin Asia Pacific Corporation (collectively the "Borrower") and other
Credit Parties.

Dear Mr. Nathe,

         Reference is hereby made to the above captioned Credit Facility.
Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the same
meaning herein as in the Credit Agreement and the Loan Documents.

     Fleet National Bank, as Administrative Agent, is please to advise you that
the Lenders will further amend the subject Credit Facility under the following
terms and conditions:

o    The maturity will be extended from August 1, 2003 to August 15, 2003.
o    All other terms and conditions will remain the same.
o    Reaffirmation of all existing covenants and guarantees.
o    The Borrower will execute and deliver such documents and do such other acts
     and things as the Lenders may request in order to fully effect the purposes
     of the agreement.

     Unless specifically affected hereby, all terms and conditions of the Loan
Documents remain in full force and effect and enforceable in accordance with
their terms.

     Notwithstanding this correspondence or any discussions we may have
regarding the Credit Facility and/or the Loan Documents, the Agent and the
Lenders reserve all rights and remedies available to them under the Loan
Documents and under applicable law. Neither this correspondence nor any such
discussions shall imply an agreement on the part of the Agent or the Lenders to
waive any of their rights and remedies, except as explicitly set forth herein,
or to forbear from taking any action authorized by the Loan
<PAGE>

Documents or by applicable law, said rights and remedies being expressly
reserved by the Agent and the Lenders.

     Pursuant to our agreement the escrow of the closing documents will be
extended to August 15, 2003 as well.

     Please indicate Borrowers', Guarantors' and other Credit Parties'
acceptance of the above terms and conditions by signing the enclosed copy of
this letter and returning it to me at the captioned address by August 4, 2003.

Very truly yours,

/s/ George E. Durstin
George E. Durstin
Fleet National Bank
Administrative Agent
                                             Gerald A. Nathe
                                             Chairman, President, & CEO
                                             /s/ Gerald A. Nathe
                                             -----------------------------------
Agreed and accepted this 31 of July, 2003.   Name          Title       Signature
1 Name: Darryl Carter 

2 

Address:2121 Meridian Park Blvd Unit #6701 

Concord, CA 94520 

3 Phone Number: 650-250-9404 

---------------------- 4 E-mail Address: mdcar38t@ protonmail.com 

5 ProSe 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RECEIVED 

zon JAN - 3 A rr = 1 o 

SUSA~! Y. SOONG 

GLERK. US O!~·TF::cr CO RT 

NO. 0151 c-~:: CA. 

6 

7 

8 

9 

Darryl Carter ) Case ~bV~l----'1----~ ) 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Uber Technologies, LLC; Rasier, LLC 

) [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

) MOTION FOR PERMISSION FOR 

) ELECTRONIC CASE FILING 

) 

) DATE: 

) Tll\1E: 

) COURTROOM: 

) JUDGE: 

) 

Defendant. ) ------------------~~-------

The Court has considered the Motion for Permission for Electronic Case Filing. Findin 

17 

that good cause exists, the Motion is GRANTED. 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: __________ __ 

United States District/Magistrate Judge 

1/5/2017

Case 4:17-cv-00003-HSG Document 4 Filed 01/05/17 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           9
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           9,081
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             198
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    184,714
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             600
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               548
<LOANS>                                        105,316
<ALLOWANCE>                                        364
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 323,335
<DEPOSITS>                                     140,885
<SHORT-TERM>                                     1,695
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,090
<LONG-TERM>                                    159,740
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            25
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,900
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 323,335
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  7,754
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               12,785
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   505
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                21,043
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               5,596
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,361
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            6,682
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  8,099
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,890
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,890
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,152
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .49
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    6.92
<LOANS-NON>                                        717
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   366
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        3
<RECOVERIES>                                         1
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  364
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               364
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Bernard JOHNSON v. STATE

CR-16-1291

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 2, 2018 Reh. denied February 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\CR.05\Seals1863.denyWAIVEfee&grantSUPP.frm

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL IZELL SEALS, 

Plaintiff,

 v.

SHERIFF RODNEY K. MITCHELL, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-1863 SBA (PR)

ORDER DENYING MOTION

TO WAIVE FILING FEE AND

GRANTING MOTION FOR

LEAVE TO FILE

SUPPLEMENT TO THE

COMPLAINT

(Docket nos. 56, 57)

This is a civil rights case filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 filed pro se by a state prisoner. On

September 6, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal. In a mandate filed on November 17, 2006, the

United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit dismissed Plaintiff's appeal for lack of

jurisdiction. In an Order dated June 14, 2007, the Court denied as moot Plaintiff's motion for leave

to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Plaintiff has since filed a motion to waive the $455.00 filing

fee. Plaintiff's motion to waive the $455.00 filing fee (docket no. 56) is DENIED because Plaintiff

was originally denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this action because he had many more

than three cases previously dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915(g). Plaintiff may seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal in the Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a).

Also before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a supplement to the complaint. 

Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a supplement to the complaint (docket no. 57) is GRANTED. The

Clerk of the Court shall file the document attached to the motion and docket it as his "Supplement to

Complaint." The Clerk shall mark it as filed on November 14, 2007, the date it was received.

This Order terminates Docket nos. 56 and 57.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 1/16/08 ______________________________

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\CR.05\Seals1863.denyWAIVEfee&grantSUPP.frm2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SEALS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MITCHELL et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV05-01863 SBA 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on January 17, 2008, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said

envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle

located in the Clerk's office.

Michael Izell Seals V77488

California State Prison - San Quentin

San Quentin, CA 94974

Dated: January 17, 2008

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: LISA R CLARK, Deputy Clerk
Case 4:16-cv-07387-KAW   Document 32-3   Filed 12/14/17   Page 1 of 2

Case 4:16-cv-07387-KAW   Document 32-3   Filed 12/14/17   Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 31.2****Certification**I, Geoffrey P. Batt, Chief Financial Officer of Novelis Inc. (“Novelis”), certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Novelis;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis 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 thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:May 15, 2006/s/Geoffrey P.Batt
The SHEFFIELD GROUP, INC., d/b/a The Sheffield Fund v. OLYMPUS BUILDERS AND ROOFING CO.

2170103

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

January 24, 2018

Dismissed.
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 Annual Report of Syntel, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Bharat Desai, Chairman of the Company, Prashant Ranade, Chief Executive Officer and
President of the Company and Arvind Godbole, Chief Financial Officer & Chief Information Security 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:



|(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.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     
|---------------------
|/s/    Bharat Desai  
|Bharat Desai         
|Syntel, Inc. Chairman
|                     
|March 15 , 2010      



|                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------
|                                                  
|/s/    Prashant
Ranade                            
|Prashant Ranade                                   
|Syntel, Inc. Chief Executive Officer and President
|                                                  
|March 15, 2010                                    



|                                                                         
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    Arvind Godbole                                                    
|Arvind Godbole                                                           
|Syntel, Inc. Chief Financial Officer & Chief Information Security Officer
|                                                                         
|March 15, 2010                                                           

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 and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Rodney Victor HARRIS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Darlene GREEN, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 03-2489.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 23, 2004.

Decided May 10, 2004.

Rodney Victor Harris, Appellant Pro se.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Rodney Victor Harris appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000), and denying his post-judgment motion to amend his complaint and reinstate his action. We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we deny Harris’s motions for a stay, to supplement the record with circuit court transcripts, and for a continuance, and we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *See Harris v. Green,*No. CA-03-565-7 (WD.Va. filed Aug. 29, 2003; entered Sept. 2, 2003 & Nov. 18, 2003). 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*