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

8QLWHG6WDWHV'LVWULFW&RXUW

1RUWKHUQ'LVWULFWRI&DOLIRUQLD

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JUAN QUINTANILLA VASQUEZ, et 

al.

Plaintiffs,

v.

LIBRE BY NEXUS, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00755 CW 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 

LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS BRIEF 

Re: Dkt. No. 151 

Now before the Court is the State of New York’s motion for 

leave to file a brief as amicus curiae in opposition to the class 

action settlement that the Court preliminarily approved on July 

31, 2020. Docket No. 151. Attached to the State of New York’s 

motion for leave is its proposed brief, which was joined by the 

States of Massachusetts and Virginia. Docket No. 151-1. The 

State of New York filed its motion for leave on October 26, 2020, 

and as of the date of this order, no opposition to the motion has 

been filed. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion. 

Plaintiff Vasquez filed a motion for final approval of the 

class action settlement on November 9, 2020, in which he responds 

to the objections made by the States of New York, Massachusetts, 

and Virginia in the amicus curiae brief discussed above. No 

later than December 2, 2020, the States of New York, 

Case 4:17-cv-00755-CW Document 153 Filed 11/20/20 Page 1 of 2
2

























































8QLWHG6WDWHV'LVWULFW&RXUW

1RUWKHUQ'LVWULFWRI&DOLIRUQLD

Massachusetts, and Virginia may file a reply brief responding to 

the arguments made in Plaintiff’s motion for final approval of 

the class action settlement. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 20, 2020 

CLAUDIA WILKEN 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:17-cv-00755-CW Document 153 Filed 11/20/20 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 31.2


CERTIFICATION





I, Craig Stout, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of iMedicor, 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 officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:





a.  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;





b.  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period (the “Evaluation Date”); and





c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;





5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, of internal control 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 control 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 control over financial reporting.





6.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.





/s/ Craig Stout


Craig Stout


Chief Operating Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer


Date: February 23, 2012
Exhibit 31**CERTIFICATION**I, Ted L. Hall, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kiewit Royalty Trust, for which U.S.Bank National Association acts as Trustee;     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,distributable income and changes in trust corpus of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this quarterly report;     4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)), or for causing such procedures to beestablished and maintained, for the registrant and I have:     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such controls and procedures tobe designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant ismade known to me by others within the registrant, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures as of the end of the period covered by this report, based on my evaluation; and     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and     5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors:     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     In giving the certifications in paragraphs 4 and 5 above, I have relied to the extent Iconsider reasonable on information provided to me by Amber Brewster, Bank of Oklahoma.Date: November 14, 2006   /s/ Ted L. Hall   Ted L. Hall  Vice President and Trust Officer U.S. Bank National Association, asTrustee
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-24-00115-CR

Jason Lee Williamson

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

329th District Court of Wharton County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 19843

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

June 27, 2024
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Green Mountain Recovery, Inc., for the year ending December 31, 2008, I, Joseph Levi , President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:  1.    Such yearly Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, 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 such yearly Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Green Mountain Recovery, Inc.   Date: March 30, 2009/s/ Joseph LeviJOSEPH LEVI
Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer
and duly authorized officer)
**[Prudential Logo]****Prudential Asset Resources**2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2500  Dallas, TX 75201 Tel 214-777-4500 Fax 214-777-4556 **Annual Compliance Statement**To: (see attached Distribution List) Re: Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, **Series 2007-IQ15**I, Catherine J. Rodewald, President and Chief Executive Officer of Prudential Asset Resources, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certify with regard to the Company's role as a Master Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, (the "Agreement") dated as of August 1, 2007 pertaining to the above-referenced certificates, that: (i)a review of the activities of the Company as a Master Servicer under the Agreement during the period from August 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007 and its performance has been made under my supervision; and (ii)to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Company has fulfilled all of its obligations, as a Master Servicer, under the Agreement in all material respects throughout such period. Effective Date of Certification: March 17, 2008****/s/ Catherine J. Rodewald******Catherine J. Rodewald, President &  CEO
United States District Court

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

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;

OTTOMOTTO LLC; and OTTO

TRUCKING LLC,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER RE INADEQUATE

CRITIQUE OF TENTATIVE

JURY INSTRUCTION

With respect to the further tentative jury instruction (Dkt. No. 2078), it is irritating that

defense counsel failed to supply any critique, including supporting authority, in its response

(Dkt. No. 2169). It is of no help to the Court to simply say that counsel approves of tentative

jury instructions. What is needed is authority to validate said instructions. This gimmick also

deprived Waymo of a chance to reply to arguments made for the first time in defendants’

counter-critique (Dkt. No. 2180), which Waymo may now do by NOVEMBER 13 AT NOON. For

the upcoming hearing on November 14 (see Dkt. No. 2168), it will NOT be sufficient to simply

say that a tentative jury instruction or statement by the Court is supported by agreement of

counsel. Both sides must come prepared with authorities on point, whether for or against.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 8, 2017. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 2181 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 0186 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ROBERT D. MAXIN ,

Defendant and Appellant .

**GRANT** Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until Ju ly 15 , 2020 to prepare, file, and serve his response to Ms. Jackson’s Anders brief.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 16 2020

06/16/2020
Case Number: DA 19-0186
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  June-30-1998
<CASH>                        410,450
<SECURITIES>                  000
<RECEIVABLES>                 1,935
<ALLOWANCES>                  000
<INVENTORY>                   000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              26,392
<PP&E>                        8,647,841
<DEPRECIATION>                5,391,169
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                3,695,449
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         243,373
<BONDS>                       6,168,080
<COMMON>                      000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         000
<PREFERRED>                   000
<OTHER-SE>                    (2,716,004)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  3,695,449
<SALES>                       664,323
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              669,583
<CGS>                         000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 306,370
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              259,964
<LOSS-PROVISION>              000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            306,882
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (203,633)
<INCOME-TAX>                  000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (203,633)
<DISCONTINUED>                000
<EXTRAORDINARY>               000
<CHANGES>                     000
<NET-INCOME>                  (203,633)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 (18.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                 (18.19)
        

</TABLE>
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 03, 2024.

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.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, May 03, 2024

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A24I0178. RYAN ALEXANDER DUKE v. THE STATE.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

22CR113
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 78 (Monday, April 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 20150]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10039]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 
meeting of the Federal Aviation Administration Aviation Rulemaking 
Advisory Committee to discuss general aviation operations issues.

DATES: The meeting will be held on May 16, 1995, at 9:30 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Aircraft Owners and Pilots 
Association, 421 Aviation Way, Frederick, MD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Louis C. Cusimano, Assistant 
Executive Director for General Aviation Operations, Flight Standards 
Service (AFS-800), 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. 
Telephone: (202) 267-8452; FAX: (202) 267-5094.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. App. II), notice is 
hereby given of a meeting of the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee 
to discuss general aviation operations issues. This meeting will be 
held on May 16, 1995, at 9:30 a.m., at the Aircraft Owners and Pilots 
Association, 421 Aviation Way, Frederick MD. The agenda for this 
meeting will include status reports from the part 103 (Ultralight 
Vehicles) Working Group and the VHF Navigation and Communications 
Working Group. In addition, the IFR Fuel Requirements/Destination and 
Alternate Weather Minimums Working Group will present a concept 
briefing at the meeting, and the ARAC members will vote whether or not 
the working group should begin drafting a recommendation. Members of 
the public may contact Cindy Herman, ARM-108, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, 
(202) 267-7627, fax (202) 267-5075 to obtain a copy of the briefing 
prior to the meeting.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but may be limited to 
the space available. The public must make arrangements in advance to 
present oral statements at the meeting or may present written 
statements to the committee at any time. In addition, sign and oral 
interpretation can be made available at the meeting, as well as an 
assistive listening device, if requested 10 calendar days before the 
meeting. Arrangements may be made by contacting the person listed under 
the heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Issued in Washington, DC on April 18, 1995.
Louis C. Cusimano,
Assistant Executive Director for General Aviation Operations, Aviation 
Rulemaking Advisory Committee
[FR Doc. 95-10039 Filed 4-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
```
United States District Court

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

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;

OTTOMOTTO LLC; and OTTO

TRUCKING LLC,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER RE LIST OF ALL

POTENTIAL TRIAL

WITNESSES

The parties shall please jointly submit a one-page list of all potential trial witnesses by

SEPTEMBER 22 AT NOON. This list will be included in the juror questionnaire at trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 12, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 1527 Filed 09/12/17 Page 1 of 1
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darryl Prevatte MITCHELL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-1546.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 14, 2004.

Patricia G. Gaedeke, Jonathan Tukel, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Detroit, MI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Darryl Prevatte Mitchell, U.S. Penitentiary, Terre Haute, IN, pro se.

John F. Royal, Detroit, MI, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: COLE and COOK, Circuit Judges; and SPIEGEL, Senior District Judge.*

*

 The Honorable S. Arthur Spiegel, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM.

Darryl Mitchell appeals his conviction on ten counts of tax evasion in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201, arguing that (1) the government presented insufficient evidence at his bench trial to support his conviction; (2) the district court should have granted his motion for a new trial under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure because his conviction was against the weight of the evidence; (3) the government withheld exculpatory *Brady*materials, preventing a fair trial; (4) his trial counsel’s deficient performance violated his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel; (5) the district court’s consideration of improper character evidence entitled him to a new trial; and (6) the trial court incorrectly determined his base offense level.

Because the record is inadequate to assess the merits of Mitchell’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim, we decline to address this claim on direct appeal. *Massaro v. United States,*538 U.S. 500, 504-505, 123 S.Ct. 1690, 155 L.Ed.2d 714 (2003) (holding that generally, “a motion brought under [28 U.S.C.] § 2255 is preferable to direct appeal for deciding claims of ineffective-assistance” because the district court is “the forum best suited to developing the *995facts necessary to determining the adequacy of representation during an entire trial”).

Having heard oral argument and reviewed the record, the applicable law and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that Mitchell’s other claims are meritless. We accordingly affirm the district court’s judgment of conviction and denial of Mitchell’s various post-trial motions on the same bases the court articulated in its orders.
# L_2017244EN.01000801.xml

| 22.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 244/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 244/8

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2017/1596

of 21 September 2017

on the minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder for the 12th partial invitation to tender within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1240 of 18 May 2016 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to public intervention and aid for private storage (2), and in particular Article 32 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 (3) has opened the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 (3) has opened the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure.

| (2) | In the light of the tenders received for the 12th partial invitation to tender, a minimum selling price should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In the light of the tenders received for the 12th partial invitation to tender, a minimum selling price should not be fixed.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 12th partial invitation to tender for the selling of skimmed milk powder within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080, in respect of which the period during which tenders were to be submitted ended on 19 September 2017, a minimum selling price has not been fixed.

Article 2

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

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 September 2017.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Jerzy PLEWA

Director-General

Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 206, 30.7.2016, p. 71.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 of 25 November 2016 opening the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure (OJ L 321, 29.11.2016, p. 45).

3

---
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

MIGUEL A. REYES,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

'

'

'

'

'

'

No. 08-13-00296-CR

Appeal from the

346th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20090D05388)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time to file the brief 

until April 29, 2014. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

THE APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Charles L. Roberts, the Appellant’s Attorney, 

prepare the Appellant’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before April 29, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of April, 2014.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera and Rodriguez, JJ.