alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Shelter
Properties V Limited Partnership 1997 Third Quarter 10-QSB and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such 10-QSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000712753
<NAME> SHELTER PROPERTIES V LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,527
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       84
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          74,989
<DEPRECIATION>                                  39,688
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  41,784
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         31,609
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,884
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    41,784
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,133
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,007
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,080
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                126
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       126
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.38<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### DOYLE, Respondent, v. NORTHERN CENT. RY. CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

November 13, 1907.)

Action by Mary J. Doyle, as administratrix, etc., against the Northern Central Railway Company.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

ROBSON, J., dissents.
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 DNB Financial Corporation (the
"Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
S. Latoff, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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
Registrant.














/s/ William S.
Latoff


William
S. Latoff


Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer


May 15,
2009
Filed 6/27/14 P. v. Lopez CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication 

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

LUIS FRANCISCO LOPEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

F067031

(Super. Ct. No. MCR042639)

OPINION

THE COURT*

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Ernest J. 

LaCalsi, Judge.

Jake Stebner, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney 

General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Leanne LeMon and Louis M. 

Vasquez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

 

* Before Poochigian, Acting P.J., Detjen, J. and Sarkisian, J.†

† Judge of the Superior Court of Fresno County, assigned by the Chief Justice 

pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
2.

A jury convicted appellant, Luis Francisco Lopez, of possession of a firearm by a 

person previously convicted of a felony (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1)), and in a 

separate proceeding, the court found true an enhancement allegation that appellant had 

served a prison term for a prior felony conviction (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). The 

court imposed a four-year prison term and awarded appellant 904 days of presentence 

custody credit (Pen. Code, § 2900.5, subd. (a)).

Prior to trial, on August 15, 2012, appellant filed a notice of a Pitchess motion 

(Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531), with supporting papers, for discovery 

of certain information and materials regarding a City of Madera police officer. On 

September 14, 2012, the court conducted an in camera hearing, after which it advised 

defense counsel that “there are no existing records [meeting the description of the records 

requested].”

On appeal, appellant asks this court to independently review the sealed records 

pertaining to the Pitchess proceedings. The People effectively concede, and we agree,

that such review is proper. (People v. Mooc (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1216, 1229.)

We have conducted an independent review of the transcript of the in camera 

hearing. Based on our review, we conclude the court’s ruling on the Pitchess motion did 

not constitute an abuse of discretion.

Appellant also argues in his opening brief that he was entitled to 905 days of 

presentence conduct credit, and not 904 days as ordered by the court. Subsequently, 

appellate counsel communicated to this court that the trial court had corrected the award 

of presentence credit and therefore that issue is resolved. We treat this communication as 

an abandonment of the claim of error in the award of presentence custody credit.

Appellant raises no other issues on appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1

WRITTEN STATEMENT
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Each of the undersigned, STEVEN F. UDVAR-HAZY, the CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, and ALAN H. LUND, the VICE CHAIRMAN-FINANCE, CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER of INTERNATIONAL LEASE FINANCE
CORPORATION (the Company), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, hereby certifies
that:



| | (i) |  | the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) |  | the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
| | ---- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: February 19, 2004
    
    /S/ Steven F. Udvar-HazySTEVEN F. UDVAR-HAZYDated: February 19, 2004
    
    /S/ Alan H. LundALAN H. LUND


29
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, June 20, 2017.

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, June 20, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17I0246. GARY H. FISCHER v. SOUTHCOAST MEDICAL GROUP, LLC.

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

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

2015V001
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 27987]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12952]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[AK-042-05-1220-00]


Limited Use to Dog Mushing Wheeled Carts or Vehicles on Public 
Lands in the Anchorage District, AL

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of limited use to dog mushing wheeled carts or vehicles 
on public lands in the Anchorage District, Anchorage, Alaska.

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

SUMMARY: Closure of all lands and waters, within the 730 acre Campbell 
Tract Facility, Anchorage District, to dog mushing wheeled carts or 
vehicles during the snow free season. This snow free season closure is 
being established to reduce degradation of the trails and conflicts 
with other user groups. The intended effect is a safer, more natural 
environment.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The limited use of dog mushing wheeled carts or 
vehicles on Campbell Tract is effective July 1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: For further information contact Nicholas Douglas, Bureau of 
Land Management (BLM), Anchorage District Office, 6881 Abbott Loop 
Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99507; Telephone (907) 267-1248.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Janelle Eklund, (907) 267-1278.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for this limited use of dog 
mushing wheeled carts or vehicles is contained in CFR Title 43, Chapter 
II, Part 8360, Subparts 8365.1, and 8365.1-6.

    Dated: May 17, 1995.
Tom Allen,
State Director.
[FR Doc. 95-12952 Filed 5-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JA-M
#### Maureen Powers, Appellant, v General Accident Insurance Company of America, Respondent.

— In an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiff appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.), entered May 3, 1984, which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice, and (2) a judgment of the same court, dated June 18, 1984, entered thereon.

Appeal from the order dismissed *(see, Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d 241, 248).

Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting the provision dismissing the complaint and substituting therefor a provision declaring that “upon the circumstances presented here, no-fault benefits are not stackable.” As so modified, judgment affirmed.

*831Defendant is awarded one bill of costs.

Pursuant to Insurance Law § 5102 (a), “ ‘Basic economic loss’ ” encompasses various losses “up to fifty thousand dollars per person”. Thus, while “stacking” of policies is generally permitted in the area of liability insurance *(see, Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v Allstate Ins. Co.,*51 NY2d 651), the no-fault act does not permit the duplication of payments for basic economic loss over and above the $50,000 ceiling (12A Couch, Insurance § 45, p 65). Although additional personal injury protection may be purchased *(see,*11 NYCRR 65.13; *Record v Royal Globe Ins. Co.,*83 AD2d 154), that is not at issue here.

Inasmuch as plaintiff has already obtained the maximum recovery for basic economic loss from her own automobile insurer by holding herself out as a pedestrian struck by a hit-and-run vehicle *(see,*11 NYCRR 65.12 [c]), she cannot duplicate her recovery by now holding herself out as a passenger in the vehicle of defendant’s insured. The judgment must be modified, however, because the proper procedural disposition of a declaratory judgment action is to make an appropriate declaration rather than to dismiss the complaint *(Holliswood Care Center v Whalen,*58 NY2d 1001, 1004). Mollen, P. J., Titone, Lazer and Rubin, JJ., concur.
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Fifth Circuit 

No. 22-10112 

Summary Calendar 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee, 

versus

Rafael Rivera, 

Defendant—Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Texas 

USDC No. 4:21-CR-240-1 

Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rafael Rivera has 

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 

(5th Cir. 2011). Rivera has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently 

*

 Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. 

United States Court of Appeals 

Fifth Circuit 

FILED 

July 20, 2022 

Lyle W. Cayce 

Clerk 

Case: 22-10112 Document: 00516401233 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/20/2022
No. 22-10112 

2 

developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Rivera’s claim of ineffective 

assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without 

prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 

(5th Cir. 2014). 

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the 

record reflected therein, as well as Rivera’s response. We concur with 

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and 

the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Rivera’s motion 

for leave to proceed pro se, raised in his response, is DENIED. 

Case: 22-10112 Document: 00516401233 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/20/2022
Office of 

Minority and 

Women Inclusion

OFFICES OF MINORITY AND WOMEN INCLUSION

OMWIs

*These agencies’ OMWIs follow the Federal Acquisition Regulation, 48 CFR 1.

Section 342 of the Dodd-Frank Act mandates that each of the financial services regulatory agencies listed below creates an 

OMWI. One of the OMWIs’ roles is to increase and ensure the fair participation of minority- and women-owned businesses in the 

procurement process. Together, these OMWI agencies award over $1 billion in contracts each year.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Web site: www.federalreserve.gov

E-mail: marleitha.g.williams@frb.gov

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau*

Web site: www.consumerfinance.gov 

E-mail: cfpb_omwi@cfpb.gov

Department of the Treasury*

Web site: www.treasury.gov

E-mail: OMWI_Team@treasury.gov

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Web site: www.fdic.gov

E-mail: MWOBOutreach@FDIC.gov

Federal Housing Finance Agency

 Web site: www.fhfa.gov/doingbusiness 

E-mail: OMWI@FHFA.gov

National Credit Union Administration

Web site: www.ncua.gov

E-mail: omwimail@ncua.gov

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency*

Web site: www.occ.gov/omwi

E-mail: omwi-outreach@occ.treas.gov

Securities and Exchange Commission*

Web site: www.sec.gov 

E-mail: omwi@sec.gov
EXHIBIT 32


                            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 on Form 10-QSB (the "Report") of
Cambridge Holdings, Ltd. (the "Company") for the quarter ended December 31,
2005, each of the undersigned Gregory Pusey, the President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, and Jeffrey G. McGonegal, the Senior Vice
President-Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of the undersigned's knowledge and
belief:

     (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.

Dated:  February 13, 2006          /s/ Gregory Pusey
                                   -----------------------------
                                   Gregory Pusey, President and
                                   Chief Executive Officer


Dated:  February 13, 2006          /s/ Jeffrey G. McGonegal
                                   --------------------------------------------
                                   Jeffrey G. McGonegal, Senior Vice President-
                                   Finance and Chief Financial Officer


                                   * * * * *


A signed original of the written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1926 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1926

    To suspend temporarily the duty on module and bracket asy-power 
                               steering.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2005

 Mr. Hulshof introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To suspend temporarily the duty on module and bracket asy-power 
                               steering.

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

SECTION 1. MODULE AND BRACKET ASY-POWER STEERING.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.85.02      Controllers for     Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         electronic power                                                   31/2008
                         assisted steering
                         systems, rated at
                         80 amperes at 12
                         V, designed for
                         use in hybrid
                         motor vehicles of
                         heading 8703
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         8537.10.90)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1863 

To amend the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act 

of 1965 to make available additional funds to increase access to the 

arts through the support of education. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 26, 2005 

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico (for herself and Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the National Foundation on the Arts and the 

Humanities Act of 1965 to make available additional 

funds to increase access to the arts through the support 

of education. 

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 ‘‘Arts Education Ad5 vancement Act of 2005’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS. 

7 (a) USE OF FUNDS FOR ELEMENTARY AND SEC8 ONDARY EDUCATION.—Section 5A(b) of the National 
2 

•HR 1863 IH 

1 Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965 

2 (20 U.S.C. 954a(b)) is amended— 

3 (1) in paragraph (8) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the 

4 end, 

5 (2) in paragraph (9) by striking the period at 

6 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’, and 

7 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(10) increase accessibility to the arts through 

9 art education in formal systems of elementary and 

10 secondary education.’’. 

11 (b) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—Section 11(f)(1) of 

12 the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities 

13 Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 960(f)(1)) is amended— 

14 (1) by striking ‘‘$175,000,000, 50 percent’’ and 

15 inserting ‘‘$98,000,000, 100 percent’’, and 

16 (2) by adding at the end the following ‘‘Of the 

17 aggregate amount made available to carry out sec18 tion 5A in any fiscal year, 50 percent shall be made 

19 available for the use specified in section 5A(b)(10).’’. 

20 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

21 This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall 

22 take effect on the 1st day of the 1st fiscal year that begins 

23 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

JOSEPH TRZECIAK, SR., )

)

Plaintiffs, )

) CAUSE NO. 2:15-CV-218 

vs. )

)

NICHOLAS J. PADILLA, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on document captioned

“Criminal Complaint” (DE 1) filed by Joseph Trzeciak, Sr., a pro se

prisoner, on June 8, 2015, in which he is attempting to bring

unspecified criminal charges against 25 federal, Illinois, and

Indiana prosecutors, law enforcement officers, and agencies which

were involved in his federal and State criminal prosecutions.

However, Trzeciak does not have the authority to initiate federal

criminal charges against anyone. Only the United States Attorney

General has such authority. See United States v. Palumbo Bros.,

Inc., 145 F.3d 850, 865 (7th Cir. 1988) (“[C]riminal prosecution is

an executive function within the exclusive prerogative of the

Attorney General.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted). 

For the reasons set forth above, the court DISMISSES this case

as frivolous. 

DATED: June 10, 2015 /s/RUDY LOZANO, Judge

United State District Court