alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SCAD-19-0000144

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE HAWAI#I SUPREME COURT,

Petitioner,

vs.

RICHARD T. MIYAO,

Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(ODC NO. 17-O-059)

ORDER OF TRANSFER TO INACTIVE STATUS

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.,

and Intermediate Court of Appeals Associate Judge Chan,

in place of McKenna, J., recused)

Upon review of the March 8, 2019 petition filed by the

Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i,

requesting this court to immediately transfer Respondent 

Richard T. Miyao to inactive status, pursuant to Rules 2.19 (b)

of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH),

we conclude interim transfer to inactive status is warranted. 

Therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Miyao is

immediately transferred to inactive status in this jurisdiction,

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCAD-19-0000144

20-MAR-2019

09:23 AM
pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.19(c), effective with the filing of this

order. Respondent Miyao shall remain on inactive status until

further order of this court but may, at his discretion, apply to

this court for a return to active status, pursuant to RSCH Rule

2.19(f), upon submission of evidence that he is fit to resume the

practice of law.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Office of Disciplinary

Counsel (ODC) shall suspend and hold in abeyance proceedings

against Respondent Miyao to the extent required by RSCH Rule

2.19(h).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ODC shall, within 30 days of

the entry date of this order, submit to this court its opinion as

to whether appointment of a trustee over Respondent Miyao’s legal

practice is warranted, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.20. Respondent

Miyao may also, within the same time frame, submit any

information or arguments on that issue he may deem appropriate,

for this court’s consideration.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of the court shall

render the docket in this matter public, but shall, as required

by RSCH Rule 2.19(i), seal all docket entries except for this

instant order and any subsequent final orders transferring

Respondent Miyao to inactive status, or reinstating him to

practice, which shall remain public.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Disciplinary Board

2
shall, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.19(d), cause a notice of this

transfer to inactive status to be published in a newspaper of

general circulation in the judicial circuit in which Respondent

Miyao maintained his practice. 

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the clerk of the court,

pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.19(e), shall transmit a certified copy of

this order to all judges of the State of Hawai#i and shall

request their assistance and such action as may be indicated,

pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.20, to protect the interests of both

Respondent Miyao and his clients.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 20, 2019.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Derrick H.M. Chan

3
# C_2008296EN.01000101.xml

| 19.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5233 — APMM/Swift Tankers Pool)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 296/01)

On 11 November 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5233. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5233. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
# L_2014052DE.01001801.xml

| 21.2.2014 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 52/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2014

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 52/18

---

Berichtigung des Rahmenbeschlusses 2008/977/JI des Rates vom 27. November 2008 über den Schutz personenbezogener Daten, die im Rahmen der polizeilichen und justiziellen Zusammenarbeit in Strafsachen verarbeitet werden

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 350 vom 30. Dezember 2008
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 350 vom 30. Dezember 2008

Seite 70, Artikel 25 Absatz 2 Buchstabe c:

anstatt:

| „c) | das Klagerecht oder eine Anzeigebefugnis bei Verstößen gegen die innerstaatlichen Vorschriften zur Umsetzung dieses Rahmenbeschlusses. Gegen beschwerende Entscheidungen der Kontrollstelle steht der Rechtsweg offen.“ |
| --- | --- |

„c)

das Klagerecht oder eine Anzeigebefugnis bei Verstößen gegen die innerstaatlichen Vorschriften zur Umsetzung dieses Rahmenbeschlusses. Gegen beschwerende Entscheidungen der Kontrollstelle steht der Rechtsweg offen.“

muss es heißen:

| „c) | das Klagerecht bei Verstößen gegen die innerstaatlichen Vorschriften zur Umsetzung dieses Rahmenbeschlusses oder die Befugnis, einen solchen Verstoß bei den Justizbehörden anzuzeigen. Gegen beschwerende Entscheidungen der Kontrollstelle steht der Rechtsweg offen.“ |
| --- | --- |

„c)

das Klagerecht bei Verstößen gegen die innerstaatlichen Vorschriften zur Umsetzung dieses Rahmenbeschlusses oder die Befugnis, einen solchen Verstoß bei den Justizbehörden anzuzeigen. Gegen beschwerende Entscheidungen der Kontrollstelle steht der Rechtsweg offen.“

---
---

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Robert D. McDougal, the Chief Financial Officer of Ireland
Inc. (the Company), hereby certify 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 my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company, for the
      fiscal year ended December 31, 2007, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                     



| | By:    | /s/
      Robert D. McDougal         
| | ------ | -------------------------------------
| |        |                                      
| | Name:  | ROBERT D. MCDOUGAL                   
| |        |                                      
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
| |        |                                      
| | Date:  | March
      31, 2008                 





A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Soil Management Research: Morris, MN
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Morris, Minnesota Soil Management Research Docs





- Reprints
- Publications by Author
- Publications by Year
- Weather Data

Abdullah Jaradat's Publicationsheadline bar **Click Here for Abdullah Jaradat's Publication List (.pdf file)** Publications may be selected by **Author**or by **Year**.See **additional information**about our publications and to order reprints.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6949

FRED LEWIS WILSON,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

C/O ROBERTS; C/O TABOR; SGT. ELY,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

B. COLLINS, SGT.; M. WILLIAMS, C/O; H. BISHOP, C/O; J. DURHAM, 

C/O; SGT. KING; LT. KILBOURNE; C/O HYLTON; C/O BOYD; TED 

THOMPSON, DR.; M. STANFORD, RN; MELISSA SPEARS, LPN; PATSY 

GARNETTE ZEPPA, RN; PATRICIA HILLMAN, RN,

Defendants. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District 

Judge. (7:08-cv-00638-gec-mfu)

Submitted: December 6, 2010 Decided: December 22, 2010

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Fred Lewis Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Fred Lewis Wilson appeals the district court’s 

judgment entered after a jury found in favor of Appellees and 

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

reviewed the record, conclude that the issues Wilson raises do 

not present substantial questions, and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we decline to authorize preparation of the trial 

transcript at government expense and affirm the judgment of the 

district court. We grant Wilson’s motion to withdraw his 

September 2010 motion for production of documents and deny 

Wilson’s October 2010 motion for production of documents. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### MOSER, Respondent, v. WALKER et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 15, 1898.)

Action *1131by Caroline Moser (now Abele) against Louise Moore Walker and others.

No opinion. Motion for reargument denied. Application for leave to appeal to the court of appeals denied, as unnecessary. See 48 N. Y. Supp. 341.
|EXHIBIT 99.1


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In
connection with the quarterly report of Netword, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2002 (the Report) and
pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted in Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, I, MICHAEL L. WISE, President and CEO of the Company, certify that to the best of my
knowledge:
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|1. |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of
          the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and;
|-- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2. |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date:  November 11, 2002 |  | /s/ Michael L. Wise
      
      Michael L. Wise      President & CEO
|------------------------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|19
|--
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 1 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 2 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 3 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 4 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 5 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 6 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 7 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 8 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 9 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 10 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 11 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 12 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 13 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 14 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 15 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 16 of 17
USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00081-JD-MGG document 1 filed 02/22/16 page 17 of 17
EXHIBIT 99.1 

 

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 Annual Report of Altus Explorationss, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael Twyman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: 

- The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
- The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 

/s/ Michael Twyman 

___________________________

Michael Twyman

Principal Executive Officer

March 31, 2003
#### Mary Kiefer, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, *v.*The Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada, Appellant.

(Argued June 17, 1890;

decided June 24, 1890.)

Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, made October 1, 1889, which affirmed an order of Special.Term opening default and vacating judgment dismissing complaint.

-51 *G. Sprague*for appellant.

*J. W. Mussel*for respondent.

Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.
Exhibit 31.1

Certification 

I, Bruce R. Lakefield, certify that:

          (1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of US Airways, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4) The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant and 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, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) [paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]

(c) 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; and

(d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 officer(s) 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 the registrant'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 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 control over financial reporting.

/s/ Bruce R. Lakefield

Name:  Bruce R. Lakefield

Title:  Chief Executive Officer

Date:  November 5, 2004
[No. 20803-2-II.

Division Two.

August 28, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Matthew W. Hobbs, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Grays Harbor County, No. 96-1-00001-1, F. Mark McCauley, J., entered June 3, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Morgan, J., concurred in by Bridgewater, A.C.J., and Hunt, J.
[No. 39436-3-I.

Division One.

October 20, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Jose Mellado-Espinoza, *Appellant.*

Appeal from, a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 96-1-01883-6, Richard A. Jones, J., entered September 6, 1996. *Dismissed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
(March 18, 1985)

#### Peter Artim, Plaintiff, v Anna Artim, Respondent, and Arthur L. Diamond, Nonparty Appellant.

— In a matrimonial action, defendant’s former attorney appeals from (1) so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.), *812dated August 8,1984, as, in granting defendant’s motion for the substitution of counsel, directed that appellant turn over his entire litigation file to the incoming attorneys prior to the holding of a hearing to determine his reasonable attorney’s fee, if any, and failed to condition the turnover of said file upon the payment of the sum thereby found to be due or the posting of security therefor, and (2) an order of the same court, dated September 17, 1984, which denied his motion, *inter alia,*for leave to renew the merits of the foregoing application.

Order dated August 8, 1984, reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and matter remitted to Special Term for an immediate hearing to determine the amount of the outgoing attorney’s lien, if any, and to condition the turnover of the file upon either the payment of the sum thereby found to be due from the defendant to her former attorney or the posting of security therefor.

Appeal from the order dated September 17,1984, dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, in light of our determination with respect to the order dated August 8, 1984.

Unless and until it has been judicially determined that defendant’s former attorney was discharged for cause under circumstances in which no attorney’s fees are warranted *(see, Marschke v Cross, 82*AD2d 944), he has a common-law retaining lien on the papers in his possession which must be respected *(see, Petrillo v Petrillo,*87 AD2d 607; *Yaron v Yaron,*58 AD2d 752). Moreover, no exigent circumstances have been demonstrated which would warrant a court in directing him to turn over the papers prior to the holding of a hearing to determine the amount of his outgoing attorney’s lien, if any, and to condition the turnover upon the payment of the sum thereby found to be due or the provision of adequate security therefor *(see, Petrillo v Petrillo, supra; Yaron v Yaron, supra; cf. Rosen v Rosen,*97 AD2d 837). Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Thompson and Niehoff, JJ., concur.