alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 

GWENDOLYN STREETER, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

CORDIS CORPORATION, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No.17-cv-00239-EMC 

ORDER REMANDING CASE 

For the reasons stated in this Court’s September 23, 2016, Order in Dunson v. Cordis, 

C16-3076-EMC, Docket No. 53, the Court hereby REMANDS this case to state court for lack of 

subject matter jurisdiction. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 16, 2017 

______________________________________ 

EDWARD M. CHEN 

United States District Judge 

Case 3:17-cv-00239-EMC Document 15 Filed 03/28/17 Page 1 of 1
Lededrick Antwon PATTON v. STATE

CR-16-1273

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 19

REDACTED VERSION OF

DOCUMENT SOUGHT TO BE SEALED

Case 3:17-cv-00359-WHA Document 25-19 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 1
Enrico Morris CORNLEY v. STATE

CR-17-0219

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 9, 2018 Reh. denied March 30, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 27, 2010 

s0920 

Order 

 

September 27, 2010 

141403 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141403 

 COA: 291264 

 Oakland CC: 2006-209913-FH 

LESLIE JERMAINE MAYES, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 18, 2010 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
**Exhibit 31.2****Certifications**I, James F. Ropella, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of First Business FinancialServices, Inc., certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of First Business Financial Services, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;  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 of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresandpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch 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 (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors: a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.       /s/ James F. Ropella         James F. Ropella
<PAGE>

Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of Provo International, Inc.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                           Name                                     Jurisdiction
                           ----                                     ------------
<S>                                                                  <C>
WOW Factor, Inc.                                                     New Jersey

CLEC Communications Corporation.                                     Delaware

FNT Communications Corporation                                       New York

Provo US Inc.                                                        Delaware

Proyecciones y Ventas Organizadas S.A. de C.V                        Mexico

FS Provo, S.A. de C.V.                                               Mexico

Proyecciones y Ventas Organizadas del D.F., S.A. de C.V.             Mexico

Proyecciones y Ventas Organizadas de Occidente, S.A. de C.V.         Mexico

Tilgo, S.A. de C.V.                                                  Mexico

Tarnor, S.A. de C.V.                                                 Mexico

PTL Administradora, S.A. de C.V.                                     Mexico
</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE**

 

**OFFICEROF GENERAL PARTNER OF HILAND PARTNERS, LP**

 

**PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with thereport on Form 10-Q for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009of Hiland Partners, LP (the “Company”) and filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joseph L. Griffin,Chief Executive Officer and President of Hiland Partners GP, LLC, the generalpartner of 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:

 

1.      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                 The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| Date: August 10,  2009 | /s/ Joseph L. Griffin                  |
|-----------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                        | Joseph L. Griffin                      |
|                        | Chief Executive Officer  and President |

 

----
# L_2017185EN.01005501.xml

| 18.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 185/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 185/55

---

COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2017/1340

of 17 July 2017

amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Having regard to Council Decision 2010/788/CFSP of 20 December 2010 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo and repealing Common Position 2008/369/CFSP (1),

Having regard to the proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 20 December 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/788/CFSP. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 20 December 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/788/CFSP.

| (2) | On 21 June 2017, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2360 (2017), which amends the listing criteria governing UN restrictive measures. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 21 June 2017, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2360 (2017), which amends the listing criteria governing UN restrictive measures.

| (3) | Further Union action is needed in order to implement certain measures. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Further Union action is needed in order to implement certain measures.

| (4) | Decision 2010/788/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Decision 2010/788/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Article 3(1) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP, point (i) is replaced by the following:

| ‘(i) | planning, directing, sponsoring or participating in attacks against MONUSCO peacekeepers or United Nations personnel, including members of the Group of Experts;’. |
| --- | --- |

‘(i)

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 17 July 2017.

For the Council

The President

F. MOGHERINI

---

(1)  
  OJ L 336, 21.12.2010, p. 30.

1

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 February 3, 2015

d0126

Order 

Clerk

February 3, 2015

149325(19)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 149325

COA: 320486

Wayne CC: 88-000218-FC

ERICK ANTHONY DOCKETT,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s November 

25, 2014 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order 

was entered erroneously.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J OS E E NR I QU E HU E R T AVI L L AN UE VA , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 74320 A ge nc yN o. A 097- 856- 023 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r14, 2010 B efo re: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an dT H O M A S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J os e E nr i que H ue rt a - V i l l anue va , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons pr o s e f orr e vi e w of

the B oar d of

I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ’ ( “ B I A ” ) or de rdi s m i s s i ng



# FI LED JAN 06 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 74320 2 h is ap p e a l f

r o m a n im m ig r a tio n ju d g e ’s r e m o v a l o r d e ra n dd e n y in g h is m o tio n to r e m a nd. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f orabus e of d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f

m o tio n s to r e m an d , M

a lh iv . I NS , 3 3 6 F .3 d9 8 9 , 9 9 3 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 3 ) , a n dwe d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. H ue rt a - V i l l anue vaha s w a i ve d anyc ha l l e nge t o the a ge nc y ’ s de t e rm i na t i on th a t h e f a ile dto e s tab lis h e lig ib ilityf o rc an c e lla tio n o f

r e m o v a l. See M

a rt i n ezSe rra n o v . I

NS , 94 F . 3d 12 56 , 12 59 (9th C i r. 19 96 ). T he B I A di d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on i n de ny i ng H ue rt a - V i l l anue va ’ s m ot i on t o r e m a nd be c aus e he f

a i l e d t o pr e s e ntm a t e r i a l , pr e vi ous l yuna va i l abl e e vi de nc e of c h a n g e dc ir c u m s tan c e s in M e x ic o , se e 8 C .F .R . § 1 0 0 3 .2 ( c ) , an dh e f a ile dto es t abl i sh pri m a f

ac i e e l i gi bi l i ty f

or re l i ef un der the C on vent i on A gai nstT orture, s e e A z a n o rv . A s h c r o

ft , 364 F . 3d 1013, 1018 ( 9th C i r . 2004) ( “ T o qua l i f yf or reo p en i n g u n d er th e T o rtu re C o n v en t i o n , an al i en m u stest ab l i sh a p ri m a faci e case tha t‘ i ti s m or e l i ke l ythan nottha t . . . s he w oul d be t ortur e d i f r e m ove d t o the prop osed coun tryof re m ov al . ’ ”) . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**








**Certification
      of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to**


**Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350**








In
      connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Alpha Motorsport, Inc.
      (Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
      hereof (the Report), I, Vincent Markovitch, Principal Executive 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 the best of my knowledge and
      belief:





(1)
      the
      quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Registrant.








**ALPHA
      MOTORSPORT, INC.**


Date:
      November 13, 2006    /s/
      Vincent Markovitch


By:
      Vincent Markovitch, Principal Executive Officer
III 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 577 

Designating April 2022 as ‘‘Parkinson’s Awareness Month’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 6, 2022 

Ms. STABENOW (for herself and Mr. THUNE) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Designating April 2022 as ‘‘Parkinson’s Awareness Month’’. 

Whereas Parkinson’s disease— 

(1) affects 1,000,000 individuals in the United 

States; 

(2) is the second most common neurodegenerative 

disease in the world; 

(3) is believed to be caused by a combination of genetic and environmental factors; and 

(4) is the 14th leading cause of death in the United 

States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention; 

Whereas it is estimated that, by the year 2037, the number 

of individuals with Parkinson’s disease in the United 

States will nearly double, and the disease will cost the 

United States at least $79,000,000,000 annually; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 577 IS 

Whereas the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease can include dementia and cognitive impairment, tremors, slowness of 

movement, ‘‘freezing’’ in place, inability to walk and 

maintain balance, speech difficulties, depression, losing 

the ability to swallow, and a variety of other symptoms; 

Whereas there are millions of family caregivers, friends, and 

loved ones whose lives are greatly affected by Parkinson’s 

disease; and 

Whereas more research, education, and community support 

services are needed to— 

(1) find better treatments and a cure for Parkinson’s disease; and 

(2) maintain dignity for those living with the disease 

today: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates April 2022 as ‘‘Parkinson’s 

3 Awareness Month’’; 

4 (2) supports the goals and ideals of Parkinson’s 

5 Awareness Month; 

6 (3) continues to support research to find better 

7 treatments and a cure for Parkinson’s disease; 

8 (4) recognizes the individuals living with Par9 kinson’s disease who participate in vital clinical 

10 trials to advance the knowledge of the disease; and 

11 (5) commends the dedication of organizations, 

12 volunteers, researchers, and millions of individuals 

13 across the country working to improve the quality of 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 577 IS 

1 life of people living with Parkinson’s disease and 

2 their families. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2








Certification by Chief Financial Officer 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 Four Oaks Fincorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Nancy S. Wise, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:







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





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





/s/ Nancy S. WiseNancy S. WiseExecutive Vice President andChief Financial Officer


May 16, 2011





This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company 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 this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.


110
Exhibit
32.1





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 China Housing & Land Development,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2010 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated
below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
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:
      August 12, 2010
            By:
            /s/ Xiaohong FengXiaohong
      Feng(Chief
      Executive Officer)
2009 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

4-2-2009

Felicia Pearson v. Comm Social Security

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 08-3760

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2009

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2009 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Felicia Pearson v. Comm Social Security" (2009). 2009 Decisions. Paper 1591.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2009/1591
1

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

 

No. 08-3760

____________

FELICIA PEARSON,

Appellant

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

____________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

(D.C. Civ. No. 2-07-cv-05581)

District Judge: Honorable William J. Martini

____________

Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)

March 3, 2009 

Before: BARRY, WEIS and ROTH, Circuit Judges

(Filed: April 2, 2009)

____________

OPINION 

 

WEIS, Circuit Judge.

The claimant in this case filed an application for disability payments in

2004. At that time, she had impaired vision. She subsequently underwent operations to

remove cataracts from both eyes and now has average vision. She also contends that she

suffers from asthma, various psychiatric conditions, and malnutrition. 
2

The ALJ determined that claimant does not suffer from a combination of

impairments that qualify as “severe” under the Social Security Act and, consequently, that

she was not disabled pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). On appeal, the District Court

held that the ALJ’s conclusion is supported by substantial evidence and affirmed the

denial of benefits. 

After reviewing this case, we conclude that claimant has not presented any

reversible error. Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination that claimant did

not demonstrate “something beyond ‘a slight abnormality or a combination of slight

abnormalities which would have no more than a minimal effect on an individual’s ability

to work.’” McCrea v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 370 F.3d 357, 360 (3d Cir. 2004) (quoting

SSR 85-28, 1985 WL 56856, at *3). Accordingly, we will affirm the Order of the District

Court. See id. at 360-61 (a determination that a disability claimant’s impairments are not

“severe” “is to be upheld if supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole”).