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

KEVIN DANIEL QUILLINAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

RUSSELL AINSWORTH, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.4:17-cv-00077-KAW 

JUDGMENT

Re: Dkt. No. 75

On October 5, 2017, the Court granted Defendants' motions to dismiss pursuant to Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, the Court 

hereby ENTERS judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff. The Clerk of Court shall

close the file in this matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 5, 2017

______________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge
Case No. 17-cv-00220 LHK (NC) 

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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

QUALCOMM INC.,

Defendant.

IN RE QUALCOMM ANTITRUST LIT.

Case No. 17-cv-00220 LHK (NC)

Case No. 17-md-02773 LHK (NC) 

ORDER ON QUALCOMM-APPLE 

DISCOVERY ISSUES FOLLOWING 

MARCH 23 STATUS REPORT; 

SETTING HEARING MARCH 28

Re: Dkt. No. 647 (in -220), 405 (in -

2773)

Upon review of the March 23 joint discovery status report filed by Qualcomm and 

Apple, the Court orders:

• As to Qualcomm’s request for Apple to identify or produce a specific document 

identified in a declaration, Apple must produce or identify the document by March 

28 at noon, or must explain in the March 30 status report why it has not done so. 

Report, 2:21-24.

• As to Apple’s clawback of two documents (22482289-96 and 4898-4906), 

challenged by Qualcomm at Report 3:6-11, Qualcomm must provide the 

documents and declarations referenced in the status report to the Court by March 

28 at noon, for in camera review. Apple may file a supplemental report in support 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 650 Filed 03/26/18 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 17-cv-00220 LHK (NC) 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

of clawback by that same deadline. The Court will hold a hearing at 3:00 p.m. on 

March 28 in courtroom 7 to resolve this clawback dispute. Counsel may participate 

by phone upon advance notice to my courtroom deputy.

• As to 728 entries on Apple’s privilege log that Qualcomm challenges based on the 

fact that a third party sent or received the document, Apple must produce to 

Qualcomm any non-privileged documents and revise and serve its updated 

privilege log as to these entries by March 28 at noon. The Court will check on this 

issue at the March 28 hearing.

• Apple must produce the log of non-responsive documents referenced at Report 

4:11-15 by March 30.

• Qualcomm and Apple must continue to confer about privilege log disputes (if any) 

and summarize the disputes in the March 30 status report.

• The Court acknowledges that these are short deadlines. Fact discovery closes 

March 30.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 26, 2018 _____________________________________

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 650 Filed 03/26/18 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7103

ANGELO HAM,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DARLINGTON COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE; CALVIN JACKSON; TIM 

ROBERTSON; JOHN MCLEOD; JAY HODGE; SHERRIE BAUGH; WILL 

ROGERS; KERNARD REDMOND,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. J. Michelle Childs, District 

Judge. (4:11-cv-01150-JMC)

Submitted: September 11, 2012 Decided: September 14, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Angelo B. Ham, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Angelo B. Ham appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ham v. 

Darlington Cnty. Sheriffs Office, No. 4:11-cv-01150-JMC (D.S.C. 

June 14, 2012). 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
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

DAVID HOSKINS, JR., *

Administrator of the Estate of * No. 15

- 071V

ANNABELLE HOSKINS , deceased, *

* Special Master Christian J. Moran

Petitioner, *

*

v. *

* Filed: March 8, 2017

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

ORDER CONCLUDING PROCEEDINGS 1

On March 8, 2017, the petitioner filed a Joint Notice of Dismissal in the above

- captioned

case.

Accordingly, p ursuant to Vaccine Rule 21 (a) (1)(B)

, the above

- captioned case is hereby

dismissed without prejudice

. The Clerk of the Court is hereby instructed that a judgment shall

not enter in the instant case pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master

1 T he E

- Government Act

, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012 ) ( Federal Management and

Promotion of Electronic Government Services) , requires that the Court post this decision on its

website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b), the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing

redaction of medical information or other information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 12(d)(4).

Any redactions ordered by the special master will appear in the doc ument posted on the website.
## NO. 12

- 17

- 00216

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF

L.A. J., A CHILD §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 114T H

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM

This appeal is bei ng dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c).

On July 10 , 2017, the clerk of this Court notified Appellant that the filing fee in this

appeal is due. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 5. Appellant was inf ormed that failure to remit the filing fee

on or before July 20 , 2017, would result in the Court’s taking appropriate action, including

dismissal of the case without further notice. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c). The date for remitting

the filing fee has p assed, and Appellant has not complied with the Court’s request.

Because Appellant has failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 5, the appeal is

dismissed

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c).

Opinion delivered July 31, 2017. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoy le, J., and Neeley, J.

( PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JULY 31 , 2017

NO. 12

- 17

- 00216

- CV

IN TH E INTEREST OF L.A. J., A CHILD

Appeal from the 114th District Court

of Smith County, Texas (Tr .Ct.No. 17

- 5232

- D)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being

considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that

this appeal be, an d the same is, hereby dismissed ; and that this decision be certified to the court

below for observance.

By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
Antwanus BRASWELL, DOC #H22341, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3216

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 24, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Christina VERGNE, Appellant, v. Jason GLIDEWELL, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2513

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 11, 2019]

Samuel A. Walker and Tee Persad of CPLS, P.A., Orlando, for appellant.

Jennifer E. Reisler of Beaulieu-Fawcett Law Group, P.A., Delray Beach, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

May, Klingensmith and Kuntz, JJ., concur.
Susana BALDWIN, a/k/a Susana Sanches Luviano Baldwin, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-2370

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 3, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 5:17-cv-00075-BLF Document 2 Filed 01/06/17 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 5:17-cv-00075-BLF Document 2 Filed 01/06/17 Page 2 of 2
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A0623. WENDI CLIFTON v. ERIN MCALISTER.

Wendi Clifton sued Erin McAlister for specific performance of a parenting

agreement that she had executed with McAlister, her former same-sex partner. The

trial court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim. Clifton filed an application

for discretionary appeal, which we denied. See Case No. A16D0075 (denied

November 3, 2015). Clifton also filed a notice of appeal, resulting in the instant

direct appeal. We transferred the case to the Supreme Court because the issues on

appeal appeared to fall within that Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. The Supreme

Court, however, returned the case to us, concluding that its subject matter jurisdiction

was not implicated, and we reinstated the appeal.

Our denial of Clifton’s discretionary application was a decision on the merits,

and the doctrine of resjudicata bars any subsequent appealsfrom the same order. See

Hook v. Bergen, 286 Ga. App. 258, 261 (1) (649 SE2d 313) (2007); Northwest Social

& Civic Club v. Franklin, 276 Ga. 859, 860 (583 SE2d 858) (2003). For these

reasons, we lack jurisdiction over this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

January 30, 2017

01/30/2017
Edward A. MARSHALL-BYRD, Jr., Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D19-0489

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 15, 2019 Rehearing Denied May 28, 2019

Edward A. Marshall-Byrd, Jr., pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The amended petition for belated appeal is denied on the merits.

Roberts, Ray, and Winsor, JJ., concur.
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 981 

To amend the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016 to ensure 

that federally recognized Indian Tribes are consulted before the sale 

or transfer of certain Federal civilian real properties, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 25, 2021 

Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. MERKLEY, and 

Ms. MURKOWSKI) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 

2016 to ensure that federally recognized Indian Tribes 

are consulted before the sale or transfer of certain Federal civilian real properties, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Assuring Regular Con5 sultation To Have Indigenous Voices Effectively Solicited 

6 Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 981 IS

1 SEC. 2. IMPACT ON FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED INDIAN 

2 TRIBES. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Federal Assets Sale and 

4 Transfer Act of 2016 (40 U.S.C. 1303 note; Public Law 

5 114–287) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 26. REQUIREMENTS BEFORE SALE OR TRANSFER. 

7 ‘‘(a) CONSULTATION.—Before the sale or transfer of 

8 a Federal civilian real property under this Act (other than 

9 section 24 or 25), if the proposed sale or transfer would 

10 affect access to Federal agency services by a federally rec11 ognized Indian Tribe, the relevant Federal agency shall 

12 consult with all Tribal governments that may be so af13 fected. 

14 ‘‘(b) FINDING OF REDUCTION OR ELIMINATION OF

15 ACCESS.—A Federal civilian real property may not be sold 

16 or transferred under this Act (other than section 24 or 

17 25) if the proposed sale or transfer would substantially 

18 reduce or eliminate access to Federal agency services by 

19 a federally recognized Indian Tribe.’’. 

20 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents 

21 in section 1(b) of the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer 

22 Act (Public Law 114–287; 130 Stat. 1463) is amended 

23 by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘Sec. 26. Requirements before sale or transfer.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 32.1****CERTIFICATION**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersignedofficer of Novelis Inc. (the “Company”), herebycertifies that the Company’s Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 (the“Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.Date: May 15, 2005     /s/ Brian W. Sturgell       Brian W. Sturgell     Chief Executive Officer     (Principal Executive Officer)     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed aspart of this report.
STATE of Louisiana v. Bryant R. ROGERS

NO. 2018-KH-1625

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2019

Denied.
|   | (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: May 21, 2012 | /s/ David M. Daniels                                                              |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|               | David M. Daniels                                                                  |
|               | Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting 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





I, BG
Moore, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the quarterly report of
Espre Solutions, Inc., and Subsidiaries on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter
ended March 31, 2008, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in
such quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A fairly presents in all material respects
the financial condition and results of operations of Espre Solutions, Inc., and
Subsidiaries.








Dated:
      November 12, 2008
              By:  / s/BGMooreBG Moore,
      Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 American Community Bancorp,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Stephen C. Byelick, Jr., 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, 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.

Date:  November 10, 2004                   /s/ Stephen C. Byelick, Jr.
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           Stephen C. Byelick, Jr.
                                           Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection withthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of ACA Capital Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”)for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Alan S. Roseman, as ChiefExecutive 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, that:

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

2.            The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: August 14, 2007 |   |                                  |
|-----------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                  |   |                                  |
|                  |   | /s/ Alan S. Roseman                   |
|                  |   | Alan S. Roseman                       |
|                  |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
### Cannot redisplay /tmp/file0.286669214527262.pdf, it has already been shown once.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

             CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 West Pointe Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Terry W. Schaefer, President and Chief Executive 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, 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.

March 29, 2004                           /s/ Terry W. Schaefer

                                         Terry W. Schaefer

                                         President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to West Pointe Bancorp, Inc. and will
be retained by West Pointe Bancorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit
10.2


 


WAIVER


 


In consideration for the
benefits I will receive as a result of my employer’s participation in the
United States Department of the Treasury’s TARP Capital Purchase Program, I
hereby voluntarily waive any claim against the United States or my employer for
any changes to my compensation or benefits that are required to comply with the
regulation issued by the Department of Treasury as published in the Federal
Register on October 20, 2008.


 


I acknowledge that this
regulation may require modification of the compensation, bonus, incentive and
other benefit plans, arrangements, policies and agreements (including so-called
“golden parachute” agreements) that I have with my employer or in which I
participate as they relate to the period the United States holds any equity or
debt securities of my employer acquired through the TARP Capital Purchase
Program.


 


This waiver includes all
claims I may have under the laws of the United States or any state related to
the requirements imposed by the aforementioned regulation, including without
limitation a claim for any compensation or other payments I would otherwise
receive, any challenge to the process by which this regulation was adopted and
any tort or constitutional claim about the effect of these regulations on my
employment relationship.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I,                          ,
intending to be legally bound hereby, and for full consideration, have executed
this Waiver this      day of January, 2009.


 


 


	
   

  	
   

  
	
  [Name]

  	
   

  
	
  [Title]

  
	
  Old Second Bancorp, Inc.