alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Tuvia Feldman, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v Veronica B. Delaney et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[943 NYS2d 555]

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the plaintiff Tuvia Feldman appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered April 15, 2011, which denied his motion (1) to vacate an order of the same court dated December 21, 2009, granting the application of the defendants Veronica B. Delaney, Nephrology Associates of Westchester, and Praveen Chander pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against those defendants upon his failure to proceed with the trial, and (2) to restore the action to the trial calendar.

Ordered that the order entered April 15, 2011, is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant’s motion, inter alia, to vacate an order dated December 21, 2009, granting the application of the defendants Veronica B. Delaney, Nephrology Associates of Westchester, and Praveen Chander pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them, was properly denied, as it was not made within one year after service of a copy of the order with notice of entry *(see*CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; *Wold v City of New York,*85 AD3d 776, 777 [2011]; *Valentin v City of New York,*73 AD3d 755, 756 [2010]; *Cazeau v Paul,*2 AD3d 477, 478 [2003]; *Lopez v Imperial Delivery Serv.,*282 AD2d 190, 197 [2001]). Furthermore, the one-year time period should not be extended in the exercise of discretion, since the appellant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his lengthy delay in moving, among other things, to vacate the order dated December 21, 2009 *(see Valentin v City of New York,*73 AD3d at 756; *Leinas v Long Is. Jewish Med. Ctr.,*72 AD3d 905, 906 [2010]; *Carter v City of New York,*231 AD2d 485, 486 [1996]). In any event, the appellant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his failure to proceed with the trial and a potentially meritorious cause of action *(see*CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; *Schmitt v Jeyalingam,*71 AD3d 757 [2010]; *Nowell v NYU Med. Ctr.,*55 AD3d 573, 574 [2008]; *Santiago v Santana,*54 AD3d 929, 930 [2008]; *Bollino v Hitzig,*34 AD3d 711 [2006]). Angiolillo, J.P., Florio, Leventhal and Lott, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001029863
<NAME> AMERICA WEST HOLDINGS CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         136,323
<SECURITIES>                                    29,385
<RECEIVABLES>                                   96,402
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,056
<INVENTORY>                                     21,735
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               337,706
<PP&E>                                         885,450
<DEPRECIATION>                                 189,265
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,600,382
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          525,684
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           459
<OTHER-SE>                                     623,401
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,600,382
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               462,187
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  428,724
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   750
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,389
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 25,937
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,983
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,954
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,954
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .31
        

</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 655 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 23, 2011 

Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 95 Dogwood Street in Cary, Mississippi, as 

the ‘‘Spencer Byrd Powers, Jr. Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

S 655 RFH

1 SECTION 1. SPENCER BYRD POWERS, JR. POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 95 Dogwood Street in Cary, Mis4 sissippi, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Spencer 

5 Byrd Powers, Jr. Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Spencer Byrd Powers, 

10 Jr. Post Office’’. 

Passed the Senate May 16, 2011. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**504 KA 10-01242**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, FAHEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
EXCELL J. MARKS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

STEVEN D. SESSLER, GENESEO, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
JOSEPH V. CARDONE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ALBION (KATHERINE BOGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Orleans County Court (James P. Punch, J.), rendered May 17, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Entered: April 20, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
# C_2019363EN.01000501.xml

| 28.10.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 363/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 363/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 2 July 2019 — Banco de Portugal, Fundo de Resolução, Novo Banco, S.A. v VR

(Case C-504/19)

(2019/C 363/10)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Banco de Portugal, Fundo de Resolução, Novo Banco, S.A.

Defendant: VR

Question referred

Is an interpretation of Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/24/EC (1) under which, in legal proceedings pending in other Member States, the courts must, without any further formalities, recognise the effects of a Decision by the competent administrative authority of the home Member State that is intended retrospectively to change the legal framework that existed at the time the proceedings were commenced and that renders ineffective any judgments that do not accord with the provisions of the new decision, compatible with the fundamental right to an effective remedy in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, the principle of the rule of law in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, and the general principle of legal certainty?

---

(1)  Directive 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions (OJ 2001 L 125, p. 15).

---
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
 Northeast Area
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        
                Northeast Area Cities

                    Washington, D.C.
                            Newark, Delaware
                            Boston, Massachusetts
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BHNRC)
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BARC)
                            Frederick, Maryland
                            Orono, Maine
                            Geneva, New York
                            Ithaca, New York
                            University Park, Pennsylvania
                            Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania
                            Kearneysville, West Virginia
                            Leetown, West Virginia
                            Burlington, Vermont


                    Civil Rights & EEO Policy StatementsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Docs Safety, Health and Environmental Training







Glassware Washing Quizheadline bar


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
#### LONDINO, Respondent, v. BELSITO, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 4, 1907.)

Action by William Londino against Amelia Belsito.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 32.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT


I, Barry J. Susson, Chief Financial Officer of Deb Shops, Inc. (the "Company"),
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:




     (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
period ended July 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
or 78o(d)); 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: September 12, 2003



                                          Barry J. Susson, CPA
                                          -----------------------------------
                                          Barry J. Susson
                                          Chief Financial Officer
# C_2019288EN.01002401.xml

| 26.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/24

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin (Germany) lodged on 23 May 2019 — BY

(Case C-398/19)

(2019/C 288/31)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Kammergericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings

Person whose surrender is sought: BY

Other party: General Prosecutor’s Office in Berlin

Questions referred

| 1. | Do the principles resulting from the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 September 2016 in the Petruhhin case (C-182/15) (1) in relation to the application of Articles 18 and 21 TFEU in the case where a third country requests the extradition of a Union citizen also apply if the individual sought moved his centre of interest to the requested Member State at a time when he was not yet a Union citizen? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Do the principles resulting from the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 September 2016 in the Petruhhin case (C-182/15) (1) in relation to the application of Articles 18 and 21 TFEU in the case where a third country requests the extradition of a Union citizen also apply if the individual sought moved his centre of interest to the requested Member State at a time when he was not yet a Union citizen?

| 2. | Is the home Member State that has been informed of an extradition request obliged, on the basis of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 September 2016 in the Petruhhin case (C-182/15), to request that the requesting third country provide the case files for the purpose of examining whether to take over the prosecution? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the home Member State that has been informed of an extradition request obliged, on the basis of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 September 2016 in the Petruhhin case (C-182/15), to request that the requesting third country provide the case files for the purpose of examining whether to take over the prosecution?

| 3. | Is a Member State that has been requested by a third country to extradite a Union citizen obliged, on the basis of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 September 2016 in the Petruhhin case (C-182/15), to refuse extradition and to take over the criminal prosecution itself if it is possible for it to do so under its national law? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is a Member State that has been requested by a third country to extradite a Union citizen obliged, on the basis of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 September 2016 in the Petruhhin case (C-182/15), to refuse extradition and to take over the criminal prosecution itself if it is possible for it to do so under its national law?

---

(1)  EU:C:2016:630.

---
Exhibit 32.0


             CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER
                     PURSUANT TO SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     This certification is being filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This
certification is included solely for the purpose of complying with the
provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and is not to be used for
any other purpose. In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form
10-KSB of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc., for the year ended May 31, 2004, I, Lisa R.
Powell, hereby certify in my capacity as an officer of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc.,
that to my knowledge:

     1. The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Rub A Dub Soap, Inc., for the year
ended May 31, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     2. The information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Rub A
Dub Soap, Inc., for the year ended December 31, 2004, fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Rub A
Dub Soap, Inc.



Date: September 13, 2004          /s/ Lisa R. Powell
                                  -------------------------------------------
                                  Lisa R. Powell,  President,  Secretary,
                                  Treasurer  and Director  (Principal
                                  Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. §1350



In connection with the annual report of Quantum Fuel Systems Technologies Worldwide, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Alan P. Niedzwiecki, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This Certification has not been, and shall not be
deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.



|                    |  |  |  |                                                          
|------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
|Date: June 30, 2005 |  |  |  |                                                          
|                    |  | 
|                    |  |  |  | /s/ ALAN P. NIEDZWIECKI                                  
|                    |  |  |  | Alan P. Niedzwiecki President and Chief Executive
Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In
connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. and Syniverse Technologies, Inc. (the Companies) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the Report), I, Tony G. Holcombe, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                      |  |  |  |                        
|--------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|                      |  | 
|Dated: March 24, 2006 |  |  |  | /S/    TONY G.
HOLCOMBE
|                      |  |  |  | Tony G. Holcombe       
|                      |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer

The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.
Exhibit 99.2

                           ANNUAL COMPLIANCE REPORT

     I, David J. Kolibachuk, being an officer of U.S. Bank Trust National
Association, the Trustee in respect of the Corporate Backed Trust
Certificates, Royal & Sun Alliance Bond-Backed Series 2002-2 Trust (the
"Trust"), certify that:

      1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K in respect of the
            Trust and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution or
            servicing reports of the Trust filed by Lehman ABS Corporation in
            respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual
            report of the Trust;

      2.    Based on my knowledge, the information in those reports, taken as
            a whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered
            by this annual report;

      3.    Based on my knowledge, the distribution information required to be
            provided to the Depositor or the certificateholders by the Trustee
            under the pooling and servicing or similar agreement for inclusion
            in such distribution reports is included in such reports; and

      4.    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
            Trustee under the pooling and servicing or similar agreement and
            based on my knowledge, except as disclosed in such reports, the
            Trustee has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement.

Date: March 28, 2005


      /s/ David J. Kolibachuk
-----------------------------------
David J. Kolibachuk, Vice President
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-51273 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ENRIQUE ALEJO-ZUNIGA, also known as Enrique Bautista Zuniga, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-03-CR-201-ALL-SS

-------------------- Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Enrique Alejo-Zuniga has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Alejo-Zuniga has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue in this direct appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL
IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D June 23, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1743

LUZ D. WICKS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-1022-4-6JI)

Submitted: October 28, 1997 Decided: December 9, 1997

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Luz D. Wicks, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Lamar Paxton, UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES, Atlanta, Georgia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order affirming the

decision of the Commissioner which denied Appellant disability

insurance benefits but granted supplemental insurance benefits. We

have reviewed the record and the district court's order accepting

the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Wicks v. Apfel, No. CA-96-1022-4-6JI (D.S.C. May 2, 1997).

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