alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Revised 03/11/2008

Case Number: Assigned/Issued By:

Judge Name: Designated Magistrate Judge:

FEE INFORMATION

Amount Due: $350.00 $39.00 $5.00

IFP No Fee Other _____________

 $455.00

 

Number of Service Copies ___________ Date: ______________________

(For use by Fiscal Department Only)

Amount Paid: _______________ Receipt #: __________________

Date Payment Rec’d: _____________ Fiscal Clerk: ________________

ISSUANCES

Summons Alias Summons

Third Party Summons Lis Pendens

Non Wage Garnishment Summons Abstract of Judgment

___________________________

 Wage-Deduction Garnishment Summons ___________________________

 (Victim, Against and $ Amount)

 Citation to Discover Assets

 Other

Writ _______________________ _______________________

 (Type of Writ) _______________________

(Type of issuance)

 ______Original and __________ copies on ________________ as to ____________________________

 (Date)

 ____________________________________________________________________________________

 ____________________________________________________________________________________

Case: 1:04-cv-04159 Document #: 223 Filed: 06/23/08 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:1605
# C_2005251EN.01001202.xml

| 11.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 251/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/12

---

Notification by Portugal concerning visa reciprocity (1)

1

(2005/C 251/19)

Sir,

With reference to our letter No 2123 of 19 July 2005, notifying you that Brunei subjects Portuguese nationals to a visa requirement, it should be pointed out the notification was given under Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 851/2005 of 2 June 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 as regards the reciprocity mechanism.

It should be added that a similar notification, under the same provision, was on the same date sent to the European Commission.

(Complimentary close).

Sir,

This is to notify you, under Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 581/2005 of 2 June 2005, that Brunei subjects Portuguese nationals to a visa requirement.

(Complimentary close).

---

(1)  This notification is published in conformity with Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 851/2005 of 2 June 2005 (OJ L 141, 4.6.2005, p. 3) amending Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 (OJ L 81, 21.3.2001, p. 1).

1

---
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Gregory J. Dawson, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kentucky Bancshares,
Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the 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
quarterly report is being prepared;
(b)	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
(c)	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 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 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 registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
(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.
Date:    August 13, 2004
BY  /s/ Gregory J. Dawson
Gregory J. Dawson
Chief Financial Officer

2
Lexlibrary/197885.1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

JEFFRY A. HILSENDAGER, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

COMMISSIONER, 

Social Secmity Administration , 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

~~~~~=D~e=fe=n=d=an=t~·~~~-l 

Case No. 6:14-cv-01955-ST 

ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY 

FEES PURSUANT TO EAJA 

Based upon the Stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that attorney fees in the 

amount of $4,319.01 are hereby awarded to Plaintiff, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act 

(EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Payment of this award shall be paid via check made payable to 

Plaintiff and mailed to Plaintiff's attorneys at Harder, Wells, Baron & Manning, P.C., 474 

Willamette Street, Eugene, Oregon 97401. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, the award shall be made 

payable to Plaintiff's attorney if the commissioner confirms that Plaintiff owes no debt to the 

government through the federal treasury offset program. There are no costs or expenses to be 

paid herein. 

-01.il-. Dated this "-'" - day of April 2016. 

PRESENTED BY: 

s/ Kathryn Tassinari 

Harder, Wells, Baron & Manning, P.C. 

Of Attorneys for Plaintiff 

U.S. District Judge/Magistrate 

Case 6:14-cv-01955-ST Document 29 Filed 04/26/16 Page 1 of 1
#### COMSTOCK, Appellant, v. URQUHART, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

March, 1896.)

Ac*1141tion by Charles F. Comstock against John C. Urquhart.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
balance sheets and statements of operations found on pages F-2 and F-3 of the
Company's Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1997, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          52,725
<SECURITIES>                                         0  
<RECEIVABLES>                                  490,029
<ALLOWANCES>                                    89,755
<INVENTORY>                                    197,731 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               668,950
<PP&E>                                       8,538,462
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,707,652
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,829,161
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,954,055
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,928,841
<OTHER-SE>                                  (4,428,919)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,829,161
<SALES>                                      5,035,338
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,035,338
<CGS>                                        2,670,345
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,670,345
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,082,713
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             135,419
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                219,847
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            219,847
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   219,847
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 USC
SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Medallion Financial Corp. (the Company) for the quarter ending September 30, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:

(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 as of
the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



|                                     |  |                   
|------------------------------------ |  | ------------------
|By:                                  |  | /s/ Alvin Murstein
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Date: November 8, 2013
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF OREGON

IN RE: Premera Blue Cross Customer 

Data Security Breach Litigation

Case No.: 3:15-md-2633 SI 

________________________________________/

Civil Case Assignment Order

1. Presiding Judge: The above referenced case has been filed in the Portland Division of

the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon and assigned to:

Presiding Judge..................................Michael H. Simon

Presiding Judge’s Suffix Code* ................................... SI

*These letters must follow the case number on all

filings.

2. Courtroom Deputy Clerk: Questions about the status or scheduling of this case should

be directed to:

Mary Austad

Telephone: 503-326-8034 

Email: mary_austad@ord.uscourts.gov 

3. Case Administrator/Docket Clerk: Questions about filings or docket entries in this

case should be directed to:

Telephone: 503-326-8050 

4. Place of Filing: Any paper filings must be submitted to the Clerk of Court, Mark O.

Hatfield Courthouse, 1000 S.W. Third Avenue, Portland, OR, 97204. (See LR 3-3,

LR 100-2, and LR 100-5.)

5. District Court Website: Information about local rules of practice; CM/ECF electronic

filing requirements; responsibility to redact personal identifiers from filings; and other

related information can be found on the Court's website at ord.uscourts.gov.

DATED: June 26, 2015 MARY L. MORAN

Clerk of Court

by: s/ Eric Oss

Eric Oss, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:15-md-02633-SI Document 4 Filed 06/26/15 Page 1 of 1
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Martin Rosa, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Calabretta, J.), both rendered April 19, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, under indictment No. 6701/84, upon a jury verdict, and attempted assault in the second degree under indictment No. 4851/84, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

With respect to the judgment rendered upon the defendant’s plea of guilty, we have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues that could be raised on appeal.

We also find to be without merit the defendant’s contentions regarding the judgment rendered upon the jury verdict. The complainant unequivocally identified the defendant as one of the two men who robbed him at approximately 10:00 p.m. on December 26, 1984. The robbery took place on a well-lit street and the defendant, who held a knife to the complainant’s throat, was only an arm’s length away. The complainant was able to give an accurate and detailed description of the assailants, and within 20 minutes of the crime had twice identified the defendant. Although the defendant presented an alibi defense, questions of identification and credibility are for the jury to determine *(see, e.g., People v Campbell,*123 AD2d 437; *People v Jackson,*114 AD2d 858). When viewed in the light most favorable to the People, the evidence is sufficient to support the verdict *(see, People v Malizia,*62 NY2d 755, *cert denied*469 US 932; *People v Campbell, supra).*

The defendant’s claim of improper bolstering of the complainant’s testimony is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.
# EUR-Lex - 52006AP0591 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52006AP0591

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Return Fund for the period 2008-2013 as part of the General programme "Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows" (COM(2005)0123 - C6-0126/2005 - 2005/0049(COD)) **

*
Official Journal 317 E , 23/12/2006 P. 0782 - 0782 *

20061223

P6_TA(2006)0591

European Return Fund ***I

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Return Fund for the period 2008-2013 as part of the General programme "Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows" (COM(2005)0123 — C6-0126/2005 — 2005/0049(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2005)0123) [1],

- having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 63(3)(b) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0126/2005),

- having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis,

- having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Development and the Committee on Budgets (A6-0425/2006);

1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM OROAMERICA,
INC.'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT JANUARY 29, 1999 AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 29, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-29-1999
<CASH>                                          30,263
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,251
<ALLOWANCES>                                    11,797
<INVENTORY>                                     13,694
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,373
<PP&E>                                          24,904
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,562
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  90,103
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,646
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                      72,451
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    90,103
<SALES>                                        174,491
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               174,491
<CGS>                                          131,522
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  131,522
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   115
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,532
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,244
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,790
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,454
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,454
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.02
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

DARCY ROY FRISBY, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ODAC, et al., 

Defendant. 

Aiken, District Judge. 

3:15-cv-1141-AA 

ORDER 

Plaintiff's Document (#3) request "an order or injunction 

allowing me to get copies of my legal material, due to the nature 

of my complaint on attorneys." 

Presumably plaintiff seeks copies of documents in the 

possession of the attorneys named in his complaint. However, as 

explained in the court's Order (#6) those attorneys are not proper 

defendants in this case and are not before the court. 

The best approach might be for plaintiff to simply request 

1 - ORDER D 

Case 3:15-cv-01141-AA Document 7 Filed 07/01/15 Page 1 of 2
copies of the documents he seeks. 

If plaintiff's document (#3) is a discovery request, it is 

premature. 

Plaintiff's motion/request (#3) is denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED this ~ day 

Ann Aiken 

United States District Judge 

2 - ORDER D 

Case 3:15-cv-01141-AA Document 7 Filed 07/01/15 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit
23.1




INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM’S CONSENT
 
 
 We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
Synergx Systems Inc on Form S-8, File No. 333-107231 of our report dated January
5, 2009 with respect to our audit of the consolidated financial statements of
Synergx Systems Inc. and subsidiaries as of September 30, 2008 and for the year
ended September 30, 2008, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form
10-KSB of Synergx Systems Inc. and Subsidiaries for the year ended September 30,
2008.
 
 /s/
Nussbaum Yates Berg Klein & Wolpow,  LLP
 
 Nussbaum
Yates Berg Klein & Wolpow,  LLP
 Melville,
New York
 January
5, 2009
Order entered August 26 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 15 - 00968 - CV IN RE FLOYD CIRCLE PARTNER S, LLC, Relator Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC - 14 - 02720 - E



### O RDER Before Justices Francis, Myers and Schenck Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY the petition for writ of mandamus. We ORDER relator to bear the costs of this original proceeding.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
SCHEDULE 10.7.1

                         AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO

                     THE REPAP ENTERPRISES INC.

                 HEAD OFFICE REGISTERED PENSION PLAN

-------------------------------------------------------------------
The following change is effective January 1, 1996.

1. Section 1.19 is deleted and replaced by the following:

     "1.19 Pensionable Service" means Service in Canada while participating as
     an active Member in this Plan and Service prior to the Effective Date but
     excluding:

     (a)  Service before January 1, 1976;
     (b)  Service after December 31, 1989 but before the Effective Date which
          the Employee chooses not to include;
     (c)  Service after December 31, 1989 but before the date the Executive
          becomes a Member of this Plan which the Executive chooses not to
          include;
     (d) Service after the Normal Retirement Date; and (e) for an Employee who
     is a connected person as defined in the
          regulations of the Income Tax Act -
          (i)  Service prior to the Effective Date,
          (ii) Service on or after the Effective Date which is an unpaid leave
               of absence.
     Pensionable Service includes a period acceptable to The Minister of
National Revenue throughout which the Member is employed outside Canada."


CERTIFIED AS A TRUE AND COMPLETE COPY


-----------------------------
Date


-----------------------------
Terry W. McBride
Secretary