alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Henna Taneja, Victoria, Australia, respondent pro se.

Motion by respondent for an order reinstating her to the practice of law following her suspension by May 2019 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 172 AD3d 1706, 1756 [2019]; see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).

Upon reading respondent's notice of motion and affidavit with exhibits sworn to July 25, 2019, and upon reading the September 11, 2019 correspondence in response from the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) respondent has complied with the order of suspension and the Rules of this Court, (2) respondent has the requisite character and fitness to practice law, and (3) it would be in the public interest to reinstate respondent to the practice of law (see Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Zerdan], 173 AD3d 1602, 1603 [2019]; Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Serbinowski], 164 AD3d 1049, 1050 [2018]), it is

ORDERED that respondent's motion for reinstatement is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law, effectively immediately.

Clark, J.P., Mulvey, Devine, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 21.1**

 

**Subsidiaries of the Registrant**

 

Maysville Marketsquare Associates, L.P. 

NorthCoast Health Center (JV Partnership) 

North Coast Health Center, LLC 

New NCHC, Inc. 

Pan Pacific (Alamosa), LLC 

PanPacific (Bel Air Village), LLC 

Pan Pacific (Cable Park), LLC 

Pan Pacific (Clackamas), Inc. 

Pan Pacific (Clackamas), LLC 

Pan Pacific (Jefferson Square), LLC 

Pan Pacific (Laguna Park Village), LLC 

Pan Pacific (North Reno), LLC 

Pan Pacific (Portland), LLC 

Pan Pacific (Pinecreek), L.P. 

Pan Pacific (Rancho Las Palmas), LLC 

Pan Pacific (Renaissance West), LLC 

Pan Pacific (RLP), Inc. 

Pan Pacific (Sunset Mall), LLC 

Pan Pacific Development (Chino), Inc.

Pan Pacific Development (Kentucky), Inc. 

Pan PacificDevelopment (New Mexico), Inc. 

Pan Pacific Development (Olympia Square), Inc. 

Pan Pacific Development (Rosewood), Inc. 

Pan Pacific Development (Tennessee) Acquisition, Inc. 

Pan Pacific Development (Tennessee), L.P. 

Sahara Pavilion North U.S., Inc.

West Coast Property Maintenance, LLC 

Plaza Escuela HoldingCo., LLC 

Pan Pacific (CTA), Inc. 

CT Operating Partnership,L.P. 

Willowbrook Center Partnership 

Haagen CentralPartnership 

Vermont-Slauson Shopping Center, LTD. 

CT(Renaissance West), LLC 

CT Retail Properties Finance II, LLC 

CT Retail Properties Finance III, LLC 

CT Retail Properties Finance IV, LLC 

CT Retail Properties Finance V, LLC 

CT Retail Properties Finance VI, LLC 

CT Retail Properties Finance 14, LLC
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-00079-HRL Document 3 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-00079-HRL Document 3 Filed 01/06/17 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1
 Certification Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)
  (1)
    
    the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008
(the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Dated: March 13, 2009
    /s/S.P. Johnson IVName:
    S.P. Johnson IVPresident and Chief Executive Officer
---

Exhibit 99.16


CONSENT OF EXPERT To:

   United States Securities and Exchange Commission Washington, D.C. 20549Alberta Securities CommissionBritish Columbia Securities CommissionOntario Securities CommissionRio Alto Mining Limited
 Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Technical report entitled “La Arena Project, Peru”, effective December 31st, 2013 (the “Report” prepared for Rio Alto Mining Limited (the “Company") I, Linton Kirk, do hereby confirm that I am a qualified person under National Instrument 43-101 and a co-author of the Report. The undersigned, for himself, pursuant to Section 8.3 of National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects confirms thatthis letter is being filed as the consent to the use of extracts from, or summaries of, the Report in the Company's Annual Information Form for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "AIF") and to being named in the AIF. The undersigned further acknowledges that the AIF will be filed as an Exhibit to the Company's Annual Report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "Form 40-F") and consents to being named in the Form 40-F and authorize the use of the information represented therein relating to the Report.  DATED the 28th day of March 2014 By:

   /s/ Linton KirkName: Linton Kirk

   B.E (Min), FAusIMM(CP)Company: Kirk Mining ConsultantsTitle: Director and Principal Mining Engineer


---
#### Nirmal SINGH, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-70119.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 12, 2004.*

Decided April 27, 2004.

Earle *A.*Sylva, Esq., Rai Law *&*Associates, PC, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Linda S. Wendtland, Esq., Ann Carroll Varnon, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: HALL, O’SCANNLAIN, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Nirmal Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal, and the BIA’s denial of Singh’s motion to remand for relief under Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture (the “Convention”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence adverse credibility findings. *Gui v. INS,*280 F.3d 1217, 1225 (9th Cir.2002). Because the BIA has adopted the IJ’s adverse credibility finding, we review both decisions. *Molina-Estrada v. INS,*293 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir.2002). We deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ and BIA’s adverse credibility finding because Singh provided information in his asylum declaration that was inconsistent with his hearing testimony and he failed to adequately explain the discrepancies. *See Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.2000). Because these factual discrepancies went to the heart of Singh’s asylum claim, substantial evidence supports the denial of asylum. *See Chebchoub v. INS,*257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001). In addition, the IJ’s credibility determination was based in part on Singh’s demeanor, which we afford special deference. *See Singhr-Kaur v. INS,*183 F.3d 1147, 1151 (9th Cir.1999).

It follows that Singh did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Lata,*204 F.3d at 1244.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to remand to consider his claim under the Convention because he failed to demonstrate that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if he returned to India. *See Kamalthas v. INS,*251 F.3d 1279, 1284 (9th Cir.2001).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Paul NEWMAN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1776

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 15, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Exhibit No. 32.1
Form 10-KSB
BTHC XIV, Inc.
File No.  0-52722


          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 BTHC XIV, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Timothy P. Halter,
Chief Executive and 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: February 25, 2008                        By:        Timothy P. Halter
      -----------------                             ----------------------------
                                                          Timothy P. Halter
                                                         Chief Executive and
                                                       Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to BTHC XIV, Inc. and will be retained by BTHC XIV, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1

Each of Thomas T. Edman, Chief
Executive Officer and President, and Lawrence D. Firestone, Chief Financial Officer,
Treasurer, Senior Vice President and Secretary of Applied Films Corporation, 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 2, 2005
          which this statement accompanies 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
          ended July 2, 2005 fairly presents, in all material respects, the
          financial condition and results of operations of Applied Films Corporation.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

September 15, 2005

| |  | /s/ Thomas T. Edman

Thomas T. Edman Chief Executive Officer and President
/s/ Lawrence D. Firestone

Lawrence D. Firestone
Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer,
Senior Vice President and Secretary
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this
certification has been provided to Applied Films Corporation and will be retained by
Applied Films Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon
request.
**B F**  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 3 - 0 337 STATE OF MONTANA ,

Plaintiff and Appellee , v. KORDY LEE DENNY ,

Defendant and Appellant .

**GRANT OF EXTENSION** Upon consideration of Appellee ’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including July 22 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve its response brief .

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court June 18 2024

06/18/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0337
17-cv-00485-WHO Document 208 Filed 03/09/18 Pag
COX RADIO, INC., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Thomas ORTIZ and Matt "Spice" Loyd, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1915

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Certiorari is dismissed. Denied.
Leorn WALDEN, DOC #R69247, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3942

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed July 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
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 Californi

a

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RICHARD H WENDLING, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 16-cv-07221-SI (SI) 

THIRD 

PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER 

(CIVIL) 

It is hereby ORDERED pursuant to F.R.C.P. and the Local Rules of this Court: 

 

DISCOVERY PLAN: Per F.R.Civ.P and Local Rules, subject to any provisions below. 

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE: September 12, 2018 at 3:30 PM. 

COURT TRIAL DATE: September 26, 2018 at 8:30 AM. 

 Courtroom 1, 17th floor. 

TRIAL LENGTH is estimated to be 4 days. 

 

SPECIAL DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL PROVISIONS: 

 n/a 

The pretrial conference SHALL be attended by trial counsel prepared to discuss all aspects 

of the case, including settlement. Parties SHALL conform to the attached instructions. 

Plaintiff is ORDERED to serve a copy of this order on any party subsequently joined in this 

action. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

____________________________________ 

SUSAN ILLSTON 

United States District Judge 

6/12/18
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
Lisa RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. Richard Scott RODRIGUEZ, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1638

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<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 Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report of Frontline
Communications Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the period
December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Vasan Thatham, as 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, 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/ Vasan Thatham
                                      -----------------
                                      Vasan Thatham
                                      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

                                      October 6, 2003
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THIAM, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

 FILLMORE PROPERTIES, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 05-01874 JSW

ORDER REQUIRING JOINT

STATUS REPORTS

On December 9, 2005, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to stay this action. The

parties are HEREBY ORDERED to provide the Court with joint status reports setting forth the

status of the pending state court litigation and the parties’ expectations as to when the stay in

this matter may be lifted or the case dismissed. The parties shall file the first of these reports by

no later than June 23, 2006, and shall file further status reports every 120 days thereafter until

the stay is lifted or the case dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 13, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Walton A. PHILLIP, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D19-0891

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed June 19, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Pursuant to5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , th e court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d an d is not precede nt except under the limit ed circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 40891 C onfer enc e Cal endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t i f f
- A pp el l ee v. AD RI AN M AR TI N EZ- CA SI LLA S , D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e S ou t h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 1: 02- C R
- 713- 1 B ef ore H IG G IN B O T H A M , D AV IS, an d C L E M E N T , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R I A M: * T h e F ederalP u bl i c D efen der ap p o inted t o represent A dri an M art i n ezC a sil l a s h a s m ov ed for l ea ve to w i th d ra w an d h a s f i l ed a b ri ef i n acco rd a n ce w i th A n d er s v . C a lif

o rn ia , 3 86 U . S. 7 38 ( 196 7) . M ar t i ne z - Cas i l l as ha s no tf i l e d a r e s po ns e . O uri nde pe nde ntre vi e w of t he re c o r d a nd c o uns e l ’ s b r i e f di s c l o s e s no n on frivo l ou s is s u e for ap p ea l . A ccord i n gly, cou n sel’ s m oti on f or leav e to w i t hdr aw i s G RA N TE D , c o uns e li s e xc us e d f r o m f ur t he rr e s po ns ibi l i t i e s he r e i n, a n d th e A P P E A L IS D IS M IS S E D . S ee5 T H C IR . R. 42. 2. United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Aug ust18, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk
James Kendall STEWART v. STATE

CR-17-0032

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Ryan PLEASANTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-657

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[May 23, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit
      31.1**




**Certification**


**Pursuant
      to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**




I,
      Frank Mandelbaum, certify that:




1.  I
      have reviewed this Form 10-K of Intelli-Check, 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 annual report, fairly present in all material respects the
      financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
      as
      of, and for, the periods presented in this report;




4.  The
      registrant's other certifying officers and I am responsible for establishing
      and
      maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
      Rules
      13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
      registrant and we 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 registrant , 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 registrant'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;




(c)  disclosed
      in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial
      reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fourth fiscal
      quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
      affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
      and




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




(a)  all
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
      of
      internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
      adversely affect the registrant'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 registrant's internal controls over financial
      reporting.




Date:March
              29, 2007/s/ Frank
              MandelbaumName:Frank
              MandelbaumTitle:Chief
              Executive Officer