alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

Case No. 17-CV-00628-LHK 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING COMPLAINTS WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

DACOREY SATTERWHITE,

Plaintiff,

v.

SHARON COOPER,

Defendant.

DACOREY SATTERWHITE,

Plaintiff,

v.

RANDY DUN HSIN,

Defendant.

DACOREY SATTERWHITE,

Plaintiff,

v.

KAISER PERMANENTE,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-CV-00628-LHK

Case No. 17-CV-00934-LHK

Case No. 17-CV-00981-LHK 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION AND 

DISMISSING COMPLAINTS 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Re: Dkt. No. 12
2

Case No. 17-CV-00628-LHK 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING COMPLAINTS WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

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

Pro se Plaintiff DaCorey Satterwhite has filed three civil complaints. The first complaint, 

Case No. 17-CV-00638-LHK, is against Sharon Cooper. The second complaint, Case No. 17-CV00934-LHK, is against Dr. Randy Dun Hsin, a physician at Kaiser Permanente. The third

complaint, Case No. 17-CV-00981-LHK, is against Kaiser Permanente. 

Upon filing, all three cases were assigned to Magistrate Judge Nathaniel Cousins. Judge 

Cousins has made a Report and Recommendation that the District Judge dismiss Plaintiff’s 

complaints without prejudice for re-filing in state court “if there is a legal basis to do so.” ECF No. 

12. The Report and Recommendation was filed and served on June 5, 2017. No objections have 

been filed, and the time to file objections has expired. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2).

Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well as the record in this case, the 

Court finds that the Report and Recommendation is well-founded in fact and in law and, therefore, 

adopts the Report and Recommendation. The Court hereby DISMISSES Plaintiff’s complaints in 

Case No. 17-CV-00638-LHK, Case No. 17-CV-00934-LHK, and Case No. 17-CV-00981-LHK

without prejudice for refiling in state court. The Clerk shall close the files.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 19, 2017

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge
Robert F. POOLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3040

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 23, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 35.f

Wachovia Bank, National Association
8739 Research Drive, URP4
Charlotte, NC 28288-1075

[wachovia logo]

                          1123 SERVICER'S CERTIFICATE

      Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement
dated as of July 1, 2007, by and among Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities
INC, as Depositor, Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer,
Midland Loan Services, INC., as Master Servicer, Capmark Finance, INC., as
Master Servicer, CWCAPITAL Asset management LLC, as Special Servicer, and Wells
Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee and LaSalle Bank National
Association, as Certificate Administration with respect to Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-C6 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms
used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the
Agreement.

      Pursuant to Section 3.13 of this Agreement, Timothy Ryan and Marilyn
Addison, Managing Director of Customer Relationship Management and Director of
Compliance Third Party Oversight, do hereby certify that:

      1.    A review of the activities of the Master Servicer, during the period
            from July 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007, and of its performance per
            the Agreement during such period has been made under our
            supervision; and

      2.    To the best of our knowledge, based on such review, the Master
            Servicer, has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement
            in all material respects throughout the period July 1, 2007, through
            December 31, 2007;

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Certificate as of
the 10th day of March 2008.

/s/ Timothy S. Ryan                           /s/ Marilyn Addison
---------------------------------             ----------------------------------
Timothy S. Ryan, Managing Director            Marilyn Addison, Director
Wachovia Bank National Association            Wachovia Bank National Association
Jordan BLAND, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2870

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 24, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Jonathan Lloyd HARTZELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3686

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 3, 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 California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEWIS DOMINIC SHAW,

Plaintiff,

v.

L. THOMAS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00462-YGR (PR)

JUDGMENT

For the reasons set forth in this Court’s Order Denying Plaintiff’s Request for a 

Continuance Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d); and Granting Defendants’ Motion 

for Summary Judgment,

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED

That pursuant to the Court’s Order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, 

judgment is hereby entered in favor of the named Defendants against whom Plaintiff alleged his 

claim of deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, and against Plaintiff.

That pursuant to the Court’s Order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, 

the remaining retaliation claim in this action be dismissed in accordance with the Court’s Order.

And that each party bear its own costs of action.

Dated:

______________________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

United States District Judge

January 10, 2018
Exhibit 35.3

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

Discover Products Inc.

Discover Card Master Trust I

The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Discover Products Inc. (DPI), hereby certifies that:



|(a) | A review of the activities of DPI for the month ended December 31, 2010 and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement, dated January 1, 2007, as
amended, by and between DPI and Discover Bank (the Agreement) was made under my supervision.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(b) | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, DPI has fulfilled all of its obligations in all material respects under the Agreement for the month ended
December 31, 2010.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 21st day of
February 2012.



| | By: | /s/ Carlos
Minetti
| | --- | ------------------

Carlos Minetti,

Executive Vice President
EX-33.1
(logo) ASSURANT
Specialty Property

260 Interstate N. Circle, SE
Atlanta, GA 30339-2210
770.763.2330
www.assurant.com

REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH
Sections 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(xi) and 1122(d)(4)(xii)
of REGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA
FOR THE REPORTING PERIOD
JANUARY 1, 2007 TO DECEMBER 31, 2007



American Security Insurance Company, Standard Guaranty Insurance Company and
TrackSure Insurance Agency, Inc. (formerly, "Safeco Financial Institution
Solutions, Inc.") (collectively, the "Asserting Party") is responsible for
assessing compliance for the period of January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007
(the "Reporting Period") with the servicing criteria set forth in Sections
1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(xi) and 1122(d)(4)(xii) of Title 17, 229.1122(d)
of the Code of Federal Regulations, (the "Applicable Servicing Criteria") which
the Asserting Party has concluded are applicable to the insurance escrow
servicing activities it performs with respect to all mortgage backed securities
transactions that were registered after January 1, 2006 with the Securities and
Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Platform
Transactions"). The Asserting Party used the criteria set forth in paragraph (d)
of Item 1122 of Regulation AB to assess the compliance with the Applicable
Servicing Criteria.


The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria for the Reporting Period and has identified a material instance of
noncompliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria. Specifically, the
Asserting Party did not have, during the Reporting Period, sufficient policies
and procedures to capture the information with respect to the Platform
Transactions necessary to determine compliance with Section 1122(d)(4)(xii).

The Asserting Party has concluded that, with the exception of the aforementioned
material instance of noncompliance, the Asserting Party has complied, in all
material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for the Reporting
Period with respect to the Platform Transactions.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm,
has issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the
Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Reporting Period.


American Security Insurance Company
Standard Guaranty Insurance Company
TrackSure Insurance Agency, Inc.
(formerly, "Safeco Financial Institution Solutions, Inc.")



/s/ John Frobose
By: John Frobose
Senior Vice President

Date: February 19, 2008
No. 95-3152

United States of America, * *

Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. Joe Harry Gluba, Jr., * * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

Submitted: February 13, 1996 Filed: March 1, 1996

Before MAGILL, HEANEY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Joe Harry Gluba, Jr. appeals after a jury found him guilty of al l counts of a seven-count indictment charging, among other offenses , possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, possession o f marijuana, and using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to a dru g traffi cking crime. Gluba originally challenged his conviction on thre e grounds: (1) the dis trict court improperly denied his motion to suppress evidence seized during a traffic stop; (2) the district court improperly denied his motion for judgment of acquittal on possession o f methamphetamine with intent to distribute; and (3) the district court erre d by a llowing the state to introduce evidence of his prior arrests an d convictions and by im properly commenting on that evidence. After careful review of the briefs and the record on appeal, we hold that each of these claims lacks merit. Accordingly, we affirm the

### 2

district court with respect to each of the three claims in Gluba's origina l submission to this court.

Prior to argument, Gluba submitted a supplemental brief claimin g that, in light of Bailey v. United States , 116 S. Ct. 501 (1995), there wa s insufficient evidence to convict him for using or carrying of a firear m dur ing and in relation to a drug trafficking crime under 18 U.S.C

. § 924(c). In Bailey , decided after Gluba's conviction and prior t o argume nts on this appeal, the Supreme Court substantially clarified th e meaning of the term " use" as employed by 924(c). By order dated December 22, 1995, we allowed Gluba to submit a supplemental brief on the issue of the impact of Bailey on his conviction under 924(c). The district court, however, did not have the opportunity to consider the merits of Gluba' s claim under Bailey . For that reason, we now remand the case to th e district court for full consideration of that issue.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           5,160
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,171,770
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (103,361)
<INVENTORY>                                    860,233
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,524,081
<PP&E>                                      26,002,967
<DEPRECIATION>                             (9,889,787)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              26,158,205
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,978,361
<BONDS>                                      7,587,124
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    203,580
<COMMON>                                       407,800
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,002,954
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                26,158,205
<SALES>                                     21,330,422
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            22,005,493
<CGS>                                     (15,938,044)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             (22,161,367)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (72,000)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (696,392)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (852,266)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (852,266)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (852,266)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)
        

</TABLE>
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 Noble Roman's, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul W. Mobley,
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.


                                  /s/ Paul W. Mobley
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Paul W. Mobley
                                  Chief Executive Officer of Noble Roman's, Inc.

                                  Date: August 9, 2005
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 82 (Friday, April 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 20997]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10539]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 95C-0091]


GNT Gesellshaft fur Nahrungsmitteltechnologie mbH; Filing of 
Color Additive Petition

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that GNT 
Gesellshaft fur Nahrungsmitteltechnologie mbH has filed a petition 
proposing that the color additive regulations be amended to provide for 
the safe use of dried fruit juice color additive, dried vegetable juice 
color additive, and vegetable juice color additive prepared by water 
infusion of the dried vegetable.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aydin Orstan, Center for Food Safety 
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-217), Food and Drug Administration, 200 C 
St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, 202-418-3076.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
Act (sec. 721(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 379e(b)(5))), notice is given that a 
color additive petition (CAP 5C0245) has been filed by GNT Gesellshaft 
fur Nahrungsmitteltechnologie mbH, c/o Burditt & Radzius, Chtd., 333 
West Wacker Dr., suite 2600, Chicago, IL 60606-1218. The petition 
proposes to amend the color additive regulations in Sec. 73.250 Fruit 
juice (21 CFR 73.250) to provide for the safe use of dried fruit juice 
color additive and in Sec. 73.260 Vegetable juice (21 CFR 73.260) to 
provide for the safe use of dried vegetable juice color additive, and 
vegetable juice color additive prepared by water infusion of the dried 
vegetable.
    The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.24(a)(9) that this action 
is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a 
significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an 
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is 
required.

    Dated: April 20, 1995.
Alan M. Rulis,
Acting Director, Office of Premarket Approval, Center for Food Safety 
and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 95-10539 Filed 4-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
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


I, Alexander Kulyashov, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that the Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB of Bonfire  Productions,  Inc.,  for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2008 fully  complies with  the  requirements of  Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB  fairly  presents  in all  material  respects  the
financial condition and results of operations of Bonfire Productions, Inc.

Date:  July 16, 2008

                                             /s/ Alexander Kulyashov
                                             --------------------------------
                                             Alexander Kulyashov
                                             President, C.E.O. and Director
                                             (Principal Executive Officer)
Sleep Problems

FDA Office of Women’s Health 

www.fda.gov/womens

Basic Facts About Sleep

Most adults need 7-8 hours of sleep each 

night. Not everyone gets the sleep they 

need.

Once in a while, you may have trouble 

sleeping due to:

• Stress

• Health problems and medicines

• Long work hours/shift work

• Light or noise

• Drinking alcohol or eating too close 

to bedtime

If you have trouble falling asleep or staying 

asleep most nights, you may have a sleep 

problem called insomnia.

Some people have more serious sleep 

problems. Talk to your doctor if you:

• Fall asleep during the day

• Snore or make choking sounds in 

your sleep

• Have odd feelings in your legs or feel like 

you need to move your legs

Medicines to Help You Sleep

There are medicines that may help you fall 

asleep or stay asleep. You need a doctor’s 

prescription for some sleep drugs. You can 

get other over-the-counter (OTC) medicines 

without a prescription.

Prescription

Prescription sleep medicines work well for 

many people, but they can cause serious side 

effects.

• Talk to your doctor about all the risks and 

benefits of using prescription sleep 

medicines.

• Sleep drugs taken for insomnia can affect

your driving the morning after use.

• Sleep drugs can cause rare side effects like:

- Severe allergic reactions

- Severe face swelling

- Behaviors like making phone calls, eating, 

having sex, or driving while you are not 

fully awake

Over-the-Counter (OTC)

OTC sleep drugs have side effects too. Read 

the “Drug Facts Label” to learn more about 

the side effects of your OTC sleep medicine.
 This fact sheet was developed by the FDA Office of Women’s Health.

To get other women’s health resources, go to

www.fda.gov/womens

2017

Sleep Problems

Tips for Better Sleep

Making some changes to your night time habits may help you get the sleep you need.

• Go to bed and get up at the same times each day.

• Sleep in a dark, quiet room.

• Avoid caffeine and nicotine.

• Don’t drink alcohol before bedtime.

• Do something to help you relax before bedtime.

• Don’t exercise before bedtime.

• Don’t take a nap after 3 p.m.

• Don’t eat a large meal before you go to sleep.

Talk to your healthcare provider if you have trouble sleeping almost 

every night for more than 2 weeks.
Case 5:17-cv-00771-EJD Document 21 Filed 07/24/18 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7078

DAVID WAYNE MIXON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director VDOC,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:16-cv-01372-GBL-MSN)

Submitted: December 19, 2017 Decided: December 22, 2017

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Wayne Mixon, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Hyman Katz, Assistant Attorney 

General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

David Wayne Mixon seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 

28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A 

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable 

jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on 

procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a 

constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Mixon has not 

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED