alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.01

                  CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER &
                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael Pacult, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
TriView Capital Management, Inc. as managing member of TriView Global Fund,
LLC, certify that (i) the Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2012 of
TriView Global Fund, LLC fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information
contained in the Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2012 fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of TriView Global Fund, LLC.

TRIVIEW GLOBAL FUND, LLC
By:	TriView Capital Management, Inc., Managing Member

By: /s/ Michael Pacult
Michael Pacult
Chief Executive Officer &
Chief Financial Officer

Date:	May 15, 2012

<page>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7118

LARRY PRESTON COOKE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CHARLES PARRISH, Chief; PAUL COX, Lieutenant;

WILLIE IRVIN, Sergeant,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-98-663-2)

Submitted: October 9, 1998 Decided: November 4, 1998

Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Preston Cooke, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Larry Preston Cooke appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we deny appellant’s motion for the

appointment of counsel and affirm the dismissal on the reasoning of

the district court. See Cooke v. Parrish, No. CA-98-663-2 (E.D. Va.

June 30, 1998). 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
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 Kushi Resources Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending February 29, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Rajan Rai,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §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) 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.













/s/
Rajan Rai


Rajan
Rai


Chief
Executive Officer






May 29,
2008









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 Kushi Resources Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending February 29, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Rajan Rai, Chief
Financial Officer, Treasurer, and Secretary of the Company and a member of the
Board of Directors, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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) 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.











/s/
Rajan Rai


Rajan
Rai


Chief
Financial Officer






May 29,
2008
J.H., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D19-0004

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 22, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 10, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

133095 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver (69) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 133095 COA: 262698 Jackson CC: 04-000690-FC WILLIAM JAMES HASTINGS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court's J une 22, 2007 order is considered, and it is DENIED, beca use it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.

Kelly, J., would grant rec onsideration and, on reconsideration, would grant leave to appeal for the reasons stat ed in Justice Markman's previo us statement in this case.

M ARKMAN , J., would grant reconsideration a nd, on reconsidera tion, would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in his statement at People v Hastings , 478 Mich 914 (2007).

l0830 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.

September 10, 2007

Clerk
James R. LAPOINT, DOC #Y53338, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3284

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 14, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Shaun Glovis SHAPLEY v. STATE

CR-16-1225

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reversed and remanded.
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LACY ROSE,

Plaintiff,

v.

EQUIFAX, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00419-MMC 

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT 

FIRST DATA MERCHANT SERVICES, 

LLC TO SUBMIT CHAMBERS COPY 

OF DOCUMENT IN COMPLIANCE 

WITH CIVIL LOCAL RULES AND 

COURT'S STANDING ORDERS

On March 27, 2017, defendant First Data Merchant Services, LLC ("First Data")

electronically filed its "Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Complaint." First 

Data has violated the Civil Local Rules of this District and the Court's Standing Orders, 

however, by failing "to provide for chambers a paper copy of each document that is 

electronically filed . . . marked 'Chambers Copy'." See Civil L.R. 5-1(e)(7); see also

Standing Orders For Civil Cases Assigned to The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney ¶ 2.

First Data is hereby ORDERED to comply with Civil Local Rule 5-1(e)(7) and the 

Court's Standing Orders by immediately submitting a chambers copy of the abovereferenced document. First Data is hereby advised that if it fails in the future to comply 

with the Court's Standing Orders to provide a chambers copy of each electronically filed 

document, the Court may impose sanctions, including, but not limited to, striking from the 

record any electronically filed document for which a chambers copy has not been timely 

provided to the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 10, 2017

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 99


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
ChoicePoint Inc.:

We have audited the consolidated financial statements of ChoicePoint Inc. and
subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2003, and have issued our
report thereon dated February 25, 2004, which report expresses an unqualified
opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to certain disclosures
required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets, which was adopted by the Company as of January 1, 2002.
Such financial statements and report are included in your 2003 Annual Report to
Shareholders and are incorporated herein by reference. Our audits also included
the financial statement schedule of the Company, listed in Item 15. This
financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company's management.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion,
such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic
consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all
material respects, the information set forth therein.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 2004
Jose Manuel MEDINA-SANCHEZ, M.D., et al, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Delvelence BURGESS, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4048

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.
NO. 07-05-0463-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TE XAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL B JANUARY 4, 2006

______________________________ Ex parte R. WAYNE JOHNSON , Relator

_________________________________ On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

_______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Relator R. Wayn e Johnson, an indigent inmate, seeks a writ of habeas corpus seeking release from the effect of five administrative disciplina ry p roceedings initiated against him while an inmate. He contends that d uring the proceedings he was denied hi s rights to due process and legal counsel. We dismiss the petition. Our jurisdic tion to i ssue wri ts of habe as corp us is l imited. Ex parte Layton , 928 S.W.2d 781, 782 (Tex. App.–Amarill o 1996, orig. proceeding). It extends only to those situations wherein a p erson i s restrained of his liberty by virtue of an order, process or commitment issued by a “‘co urt or judg e.’” Id. ; T E X
. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . art. 22.221(d) (Vernon 2004). Nothing in John son’s pe tition i llustrate s that the adminis trative d iscipli nary decisions about wh ich he co mplains were iss ued by a court or judge as contemplated by art. 22.221(d ). Thus, he failed to illustrate that we have juri sdiction to consi der the ma tter.2

The petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Per Curi am
EXHIBIT 31.2: Rule 13a-14(a) Certification

I, Du Song, certify that:

       1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Iron
Star Development, Inc.;

       2.  Based on my knowledge, this 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  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 officers 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
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 controls 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 officers and I
have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls
over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the
audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent functions):

       a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal controls 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 controls over financial reporting.

Date: May 12, 2006                      /s/ Du Song
                                        --------------------------------
                                        Du Song, Chief Financial Officer
EX PARTE Joey GRIZZELL

CR-17-0072

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 29, 2018 Reh. denied February 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MICHAEL DORMAN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

THE CHARLES SCHWAB 

CORPORATION, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 17-cv-00285 CW 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

COMPEL ARBITRATION OF 

DORMAN’S INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS 

AND STAYING ACTION PENDING 

ARBITRATION 

Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit’s conclusion that the breach 

of fiduciary claims asserted in the First Amended Class Action 

Complaint on behalf of Plaintiff Michael Dorman are subject to an 

enforceable arbitration provision in the Schwab Retirement 

Savings and Investment Plan, see Memorandum at 2-6, Docket No. 

145, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ request to compel arbitration 

of Dorman’s individual claims1 and to stay this action pending 

arbitration. See Mot. to Compel Arbitration at 2, Docket No. 70. 

The Clerk shall administratively close this case, subject to 

reopening if a petition to enforce the arbitration award is 

filed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 20, 2019 

CLAUDIA WILKEN 

United States District Judge 

 1

 Consistent with the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, the claims to 

be arbitrated are Dorman’s “individual claims limited to seeking 

relief for the impaired value of the plan assets in the 

individual’s own account resulting from the alleged fiduciary 

breaches.” Memorandum at 6, Docket No. 145. 

Case 4:17-cv-00285-CW Document 148 Filed 11/20/19 Page 1 of 1
ex10-7.htm


    Exhibit
10.7 – Order Approving Application of Final Decree

     

     

     

    SO
ORDERED.

    


    


    


     

     

    DATED
JULY 28, 2006

     

     

    

    REDFIELD T. BAUM, SR.

    U.S.
BANKRUPTCY JUDGE

     

     

    Mark J.
Giunta (#015079)

    Law
Office of Mark J. Giunta

    845 N.
Third Ave.

    Phoenix,
AZ 85003-1408

    Phone
(602) 307-0837

    Fax (602)
307-0838

    Email:
mark.giunta@azbar.org

    


    Attorney
for visitalk.Com, Inc.

    


    IN
THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

    FOR
THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

    


    
      	
              In
      re:

              VISITALK.COM,
      INC.,

              an
      Arizona Corporation

              Debtor,

            	
              Chapter
      11 Proceeding

              Case
      No. 00-13035-PHX-RTB

               

            


    

    


    ORDER
APPROVING APPLICATION TO ENTER FINAL DECREE

    


    Upon consideration of the Debtor’s
Application To Enter Final Decree, no responses or objections having been filed,
and good cause appearing,

     

    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a final
decree is entered in this matter.

     

    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the
notwithstanding the entry of the final decree the Court
shall retain jurisdiction over all pending adversary proceedings brought within
the above captioned bankruptcy case, the Creditors’ Trustee, approval of the
Creditor’s Trustee fees, and the Creditors’ Trust.

    
      
        
        

      

      
        
        

        
          

        

      

      
        
        

      

    

    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that entry of the
final decree shall in no way disturb the Creditor’s Trustee’s prosecution of
various causes of action in other Courts including the United States District
Court of the District of Arizona.

    


    
      	
              Dated:____________________

            	
              _____________________________

            
	 
      	
              The
      Honorable Redfield T. Baum

            
	 
      	
              U.S.
      Bankruptcy Court

            


    

    
      
        
        

      

      
        -2-
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 2 1

- 0617 V

UNPUBLISHED

THOMAS MEIROSE

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: May 19, 2022

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine

Administration (SIRVA)

Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA , for Petitioner.

Zoe Wade , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On January 12, 2021

, Thomas Meirose filed a petition for compensation under the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 10, et seq. 2 (the

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered a lef t shoulder injury related to vaccine

administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administe red on October 26, 2018 . Petition at 1

. T he case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of

the Office of Special Masters.

On May 19, 2022

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that

P etitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1.

Specifically, R espondent agrees that Petitioner ha s sat isfied the criteria set forth in the

Vaccine Injury Table ( “ Table ” ) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation ( “ QAI ” ) for

1 Because this unpublished R uling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required

to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

- Government Act

of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government

Services). This means the R uling will be available to anyone with ac cess to the internet. In accordance

with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information,

the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that

the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease

of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. §

300aa (2012 ).2

SIRVA

. Id. at 9 (citing 42 C.F. R. § 100.3(a)(XIV)(B), (c)(10) . Respondent further agrees

that the case was timely filed; that the vaccine was received in the United States; and that

Petitioner satisfies the statutory severity requirement by suffering the residual effects or

complications of her injury for more than six months after vaccine administration

. Id.

(citing Vaccine Act sections 11(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) and 11(c)(1)(D)(i)).

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANT EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER -1-

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

Scott J. Sagaria (SBN 217981)

SJSagaria@sagarialaw.com

Elliot W. Gale (SBN 263326)

EGale@sagarialaw.com

Joe Angelo (SBN 268542)

JAngelo@sagarialaw.com

SAGARIA LAW, P.C.

3017 Douglas Blvd., Ste 100

Roseville, CA 95661

Telephone: (408) 279-2288

Facsimile: (408) 297-2299

Attorneys for Plaintiff Jessilyn Manimbao

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESSILYN MANIMBAO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, 

INC., ET AL.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 3:17-cv-00394-JST

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF 

DEFENDANT EXPERIAN 

INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

TO THE COURT, CLERK OF COURT, AND ALL PARTIES:

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between plaintiff Jessilyn Manimbao and 

defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. that Experian Information Solutions, Inc. be 

dismissed from this action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule

41(a)(2), and that each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs.

//

//

//

//

//
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANT EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER -2-

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

DATED: September 15, 2017 Sagaria Law, P.C.

By: /s/ Elliot Gale

Elliot Gale

Attorney for Plaintiff Jessilyn Manimbao

DATED: September 15, 2017 Jones Day

By: /s/ Benjamin Chung Lee

Benjamin Chung Lee

Attorney for Defendant Experian 

Information Solutions, Inc.

I, Elliot Gale, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file this 

Stipulation. I hereby attest that Benjamin Chung Lee has concurred in this filing.

/s/ Elliot Gale

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation of the Parties, Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is 

dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

Hon. Jon S. Tigar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

September 18, 2017