alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### James Victor PAULK, Tammy Paulk, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., a corporation, Defendant-Appellee. Tammy Paulk, James Victor Paulk, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CSX Transportation, Inc. a corporation, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 10-13561.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 26, 2011.

Ben B. Mills, Jr., Mills & Larkey, PC, Fitzgerald, GA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Robert Eric Bilik, Sara F. Holladay-Tobias, Jeffrey S. York, McGuire Woods, LLP, Jacksonville, FL, James B. Durham, Durham & Rizzi, P.C., Brunswick, GA, for Defendant-App ellee.

*655Before TJOFLAT, CARNES, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The judgment of the district court is affirmed on the basis of Pace *v. CSX Transp., Inc.,*613 F.3d 1066 (11th Cir.2010), which was issued after the plaintiffs filed their notice of appeal. Any remedy for the plaintiffs must come from the Surface Transportation Board.1

1

. This case was removed from the oral argument calendar under the provisions of 11th Cir. R. 34 — 3(f).
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-14-0000041

07-OCT-2015

08:38 AM
Exhibit 32.2




Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Joseph Calarco, the Principal Financial Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of WorldGate Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011, which this certification accompanies, fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and information contained in the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.





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




Dated: May 16, 2011

/s/Joseph A. CalarcoJoseph A. CalarcoController and Vice President, Finance(Principal Financial Officer)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Neil Calvin JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-6565.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 28, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 2, 2011.

Neil Calvin Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Rose Mary Sheppard Parham, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Neil Calvin Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7864

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

FRANCISCO BRYAN, a/k/a Panama, a/k/a James Enrique, a/k/a Enrique James,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:94-cr-00068-F)

Submitted: December 15, 2009 Decided: December 22, 2009

Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Francisco Bryan, Appellant Pro Se. George Edward Bell Holding, United States Attorney, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Francisco Bryan appeals the district court’s order

granting his motion for sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. United States v. Bryan , No. 5:94-cr00068-F (E.D.N.C. Sept. 29, 2009). 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
**Exhibit 23.1**
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-155421) andForm S-8 (Nos. 333-133601, 333-133599, 33-46724-99, 33-57675-99, 33-62394-99, 333-17407-99, 333-25857-99, 333-53912-99,333-80511-99, 333-107450, and 333-107451) of Noble Corporation of our report dated February 27, 2009 relating to theconsolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears inthis Form 10-K.
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Houston, Texas
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code,

as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United
States Code, the undersigned, Michael T. Kennedy, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Radnor Holdings Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that:



The Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended March 26, 2004 (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |                                      
|--------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated: August 6, 2004 |  | /s/ Michael T. Kennedy               
|                      |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                      |  | (Principal Executive Officer)        



A signed original of this written
statement 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.
(May 10, 2012)

#### Adrienne McAllister, Respondent, v New York City Transit Authority et al., Appellants.

[943 NYS2d 524]—

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered February 23, 2011, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff pedestrian was struck by a bus driven by defendant Cornett while the bus was making a left turn at an intersection. In support of their motion for summary judgment, defendants submitted Cornett’s testimony that he scanned the intersection before making the turn, observed no pedestrians before and while making the turn, turned slowly, stayed in his lane of travel at all times, and had no problems with visibility.

In opposition to the motion, plaintiffs submissions raised triable issues of fact. Although the findings of negligence set forth in the internal investigatory report of defendant Transit Authority were inadmissible, as they were based upon internal standards that impose higher standards than common law *(see Karoon v New York City Tr. Auth.,*286 AD2d 648, 649 [2001]), the otherwise admissible contents of the report raise triable issues of fact as to Cornett’s manner of driving at the time plaintiff was struck.

Such contents show that the rear left tires of the bus protruded into the opposite lane of travel, and that the bus was about 50 feet from the crosswalk. Cornett’s deposition testimony, that he was three quarters of the way through his left turn when plaintiff impacted the left side of the bus, just behind the driver’s window, could also support a reasonable inference that plaintiff was near the center of the street, raising issues of fact as to whether Cornett should have seen her. Moreover, plaintiffs expert’s review of the admissible contents of the investigatory report, the deposition testimony, and his personal examination of the intersection, provided a sufficient basis for him to opine that the accident was caused by driver inattentiveness *(see Joannis v Cahill,*71 AD3d 1437, 1439 [2010]). Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Saxe, Sweeny, Acosta and Renwick, JJ.
# C_2019312EN.01000601.xml

| 16.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 312/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 312/6

---

Appeal brought on 14 June 2019 by Amador Rodriguez Prieto against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 4 April 2019 in Case T-61/18, Rodriguez Prieto v Commission

(Case C-457/19 P)

(2019/C 312/08)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Amador Rodriguez Prieto (represented by: S. Orlandi, T. Martin, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment of the General Court of 4 April 2019 in Case T-61/18 in so far as it dismisses the claim for compensation in respect of the non-material damage suffered by the appellant; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment of the General Court of 4 April 2019 in Case T-61/18 in so far as it dismisses the claim for compensation in respect of the non-material damage suffered by the appellant;

| — | order the Commission to compensate the appellant for the non-material damage suffered by paying him compensation fixed at a flat rate of EUR 100 000; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to compensate the appellant for the non-material damage suffered by paying him compensation fixed at a flat rate of EUR 100 000;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The appellant claims that the judgment under appeal is vitiated by an error of law regarding the unlawfulness of the Commission’s conduct towards him during the criminal proceedings, particularly in the light of his status as the whistle-blower that gave rise to the ‘Eurostat case’.

---
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 749 

To establish a revenue source for fair elections financing of Senate campaigns 

by providing an excise tax on amounts paid pursuant to contracts with 

the United States Government. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 6 (legislative day, APRIL 5), 2011 

Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. FRANKEN, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. KERRY, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. MERKLEY, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. SANDERS, Mrs. SHAHEEN, and Mr. TESTER) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To establish a revenue source for fair elections financing 

of Senate campaigns by providing an excise tax on 

amounts paid pursuant to contracts with the United 

States Government. 

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 ‘‘Fair Elections Revenue 

5 Act of 2011’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 749 IS

1 SEC. 2. FAIR ELECTIONS FUND REVENUE. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Internal Revenue Code of 

3 1986 is amended by inserting after chapter 36 the fol4 lowing new chapter: 

5 ‘‘CHAPTER 37—TAX ON PAYMENTS PURSU6 ANT TO CERTAIN GOVERNMENT CON7 TRACTS 

‘‘Sec. 4501. Imposition of tax. 

8 ‘‘SEC. 4501. IMPOSITION OF TAX. 

9 ‘‘(a) TAX IMPOSED.—There is hereby imposed on any 

10 payment made to a qualified person pursuant to a contract 

11 with the Government of the United States a tax equal to 

12 0.50 percent of the amount paid. 

13 ‘‘(b) LIMITATION.—The aggregate amount of tax im14 posed under subsection (a) for any calendar year shall not 

15 exceed $500,000. 

16 ‘‘(c) QUALIFIED PERSON.—For purposes of this sec17 tion, the term ‘qualified person’ means any person 

18 which— 

19 ‘‘(1) is not a State or local government, a for20 eign nation, or an organization described in section 

21 501(c)(3) which is exempt from taxation under sec22 tion 501(a), and 

23 ‘‘(2) has contracts with the Government of the 

24 United States with a value in excess of $10,000,000. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 749 IS

1 ‘‘(d) PAYMENT OF TAX.—The tax imposed by this 

2 section shall be paid by the person receiving such payment. 

3 ‘‘(e) USE OF REVENUE GENERATED BY TAX.—It is 

4 the sense of the Senate that amounts equivalent to the 

5 revenue generated by the tax imposed under this chapter 

6 should be appropriated for the financing of a Fair Elec7 tions Fund and used for the public financing of Senate 

8 elections.’’. 

9 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of chap10 ter of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 

11 inserting after the item relating to chapter 36 the fol12 lowing: 

‘‘CHAPTER 37—TAX ON PAYMENTS PURSUANT TO CERTAIN GOVERNMENT

CONTRACTS’’. 

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

14 this section shall apply to contracts entered into after the 

15 date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
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 Annual Report of Optigenex Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Report"), I, Richard
Serbin, as Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                                            /s/Anthony Bonelli
                                            -----------------
                                            Anthony Bonelli,
                                            Chief Executive Officer (Principal
                                            Executive Officer)

Dated: February 10, 2006
#### The People ex rel. Katharine H. Richmond, Appellant, *v.*John H. Wilson et al., as Trustees, etc., Respondents.

(Argued May 2, 1890 ;

decided June 3, 1890.)

Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made December 11, 1888, which affirmed the proceedings of defendants, as trustees of the village of Flushing in assessing lots of the relator.

*John W. Weed*for appellant.

*Ed/ward E. Sprague*for respondents.

Agree to affirm ; no opinion.

All concur.

Order affirmed;
##### 



AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED
PURCHASE AGREEMENT DCT-021/03
    WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 NOW, THEREFORE
 1. Additional Aircraft delivery schedule:
   Additional
    
    Contractual DeliveryAircraft #
    
    Month
    
    Block #26**
    
    **27
    
    **28
    
    **
    
    **29
    
    **30
    
    **31**
    
    **32
    
    **33
    
    **
    
    **34
    
    **35
    
    **
 
   1 of 5




---



##### 



Additional
    
    Contractual DeliveryAircraft #
    
    Month
    
    Block #36**
    
    **37
    
    **38
    
    **
    
    **39
    
    **40
    
    **41**
    
    **42
    
    **43
    
    **
    
    **44
    
    **45
    
    **46**
    
    **47
    
    **48
    
    **
    
    **49
    
    **50
    
    **51**
    
    **52
    
    **53
    
    **
    
    **53
    
    **55
    
    **56**
    
    **
    
    **57
    
    **
    2. Option Aircraft delivery schedule:
   
   2 of 5




---



##### 



Optional Aircraft
 Optional
    
    Contractual DeliveryAircraft #
    
    Month1
    
    **2
    
    **3
    
    **4
    
    **5
    
    **6
    
    **7
    
    **8
    
    **9
    
    **10
    
    **11
    
    **12
    
    **13
    
    **14
    
    **15
    
    **16
    
    **17
    
    **18
    
    **19
    
    **20
    
    **
 3. Coat Hooks in first class cabin
  4. Aircraft Basic Price
   EMBRAER 190 Initial Aircraft
    
    US$ **EMBRAER 190 Additional Aircraft
    
    US$ **
  
   3 of 5




---



##### 



5. Miscellaneous
  
   4 of 5




---



##### 



EMBRAER  Empresa Brasileire de
Aeronáutica S.A.
    
    
    
    US Airways Group, Inc.By:
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Thomas T. WeirName:
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Name:
    
    Thomas T. WeirTitle:
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Title:
    
    Vice President and TreasurerBy:
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Date: 8/15/07Name:
    
    
    
    
    
    Place: Tempe, Arizona USATitle:Date:Place:Witness:
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Witness:
    
    /s/ Ann F. HaltonName:
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Name: Ann F. Halton
 
   5 of 5
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Farm Credit Administration

          - 12 CFR Part 655
          - RIN 3052-AD47

# AGENCY:

Farm Credit Administration.

# ACTION:

Notification of effective date.

# SUMMARY:

The Farm Credit Administration (FCA) issued a direct final rule adopting administrative amendments to eliminate requirements for the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (Farmer Mac) to submit paper copies of certain reports to the FCA's Office of Secondary Market Oversight (OSMO). Electronic copies of the reports are sufficient for oversight and examination purposes.

# DATES:

The direct final rule amending 12 CFR part 655, published on May 24, 2021 (86 FR 27797), is effective on July 9, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

*Technical Information:*                         Tiffany West, Assistant to the Director, Office of Secondary Market Oversight, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090, (703) 883-4280, TTY (703) 883-4056; or                    

*Legal Information:*                         Hazem Isawi, Senior Attorney, Office of General Counsel, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090, (703) 883-4020, TTY (703) 883-4056.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On May 24, 2021, FCA issued a direct final rule adopting administrative amendments to eliminate requirements for Farmer Mac to submit paper copies of certain reports to OSMO. In accordance with 12 U.S.C. 2252(c)(1), the effective date of the rule is no earlier than 30 days from the date of publication in the                     **Federal Register**                     during which either or both Houses of Congress are in session. Based on the records of the sessions of Congress, the effective date of the regulations is July 9, 2021.                

Dated: July 12, 2021.

Dale Aultman,

Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.

[FR Doc. 2021-15115 Filed 7-15-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
May 31 , 2012



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

CITY OF HOUSTON , Appellant

NO. 14

- 10

- 00971

- CV V.

SHAYN A. PROLER , Appellee

____________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of A ppellee signed July 7, 2010 was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find the trial
court erred in part . We therefore order the portions of the judgment (1) dismissi ng for want of jurisdiction Appellant’s claim that the hearin g examiner exceeded his jurisdiction by awarding overtime compensation and request for declaratory relief relative to this claim and (2) awarding Appellee attorney’s fees relative to Appellant’s declaratory

judgment action are REVERSED and ordered severed and REMANDED for proceeding s in accordance with this C ourt’ s opinion.

Further, we find no error in the remainder of the judgment and order it
AFFIRMED

.

We order each party to pay its own costs incurred in this appeal. We further order
this decision certified below for observance.
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

amended

 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bi-Optic Ventures Inc.(the Company) for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Harry Chew, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1.

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:  January 27, 2012



/s/ Harry Chew

Harry Chew

Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Director

(Principal Executive Officer)





1
#### CLOUGH, Appellant, v. FOX et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

October 9, 1907.)

Action by Aaron Clough against Walter Fox and others.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.