alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*

Honorable Donald P. Lay, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by

designation. 

United States Court of Appeals,

Eleventh Circuit.

No. 96-8362.

BOARDMAN PETROLEUM, INC. d.b.a. Red & Jack Oil Company, Plaintiff, CounterDefendant, Appellee.

v.

FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, Counter-Claimant, Appellant.

Aug. 18, 1998

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia (No. CV193-033-

DHB); Dudley H. Bowen, Judge.

Before HATCHETT, Chief Judge, ANDERSON, Circuit Judge, and LAY*

, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

In our prior opinion in this case, Boardman Petroleum Inc. v. Federated Mutual Insurance

Co., 119 F.3d 883 (11th Cir.1997), we certified the following questions to the Supreme Court of

Georgia:

(1) What is the appropriate trigger of coverage under general liability policies such as the ones at

issue in this case?

(2) Does an "owned or rented" coverage exclusion in general liability policies such as the ones at

issue bar coverage of all or a portion of an insured's claims for indemnification for the cost

of a state ordered contamination clean-up when that clean-up involves soil and groundwater

contamination which has not yet damaged surrounding soil and/or groundwater?

The Supreme Court of Georgia did not reach the trigger of coverage issue in the first certified

question because it found that the owned or rented exclusion is dispositive.

The Supreme Court of Georgia has answered the second certified question as follows:
Where there is no evidence of a reasonable present threat of harm to third-party property,

coverage is barred. [Boardman Petroleum, Inc. v. Federated Mutual Insurance Co., 269 Ga.

326, 498 S.E.2d 492 (1998).] Any other construction is contrary to the policy language and

would render the owned or rented exclusion meaningless because in almost every case the

policyholder could simply contend that contamination on its own property presents a threat

of future harm to off-site property....

[Therefore,] ... the plain language of the owned or rented property exclusion bars coverage

for indemnification for the cost of a state-ordered contamination clean-up when that clean-up

involves soil and groundwater contamination to property owned or rented by the insured, and

does not involve property of a third party, and poses no immediate or imminent threat of

off-site contamination.

Boardman Petroleum, Inc. v. Federated Mutual Ins. Co., 269 Ga. 326, 498 S.E.2d 492 (1998).

The district court erred in holding that the clean-up costs for contamination on Boardman's

leased premises were covered in the insurance policy, despite the exclusion for damage to property

that Boardman "owned, occupied or rented." Accordingly, we reverse the district court's grant of

summary judgment in Boardman's favor and remand for further proceedings consistent with this

opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-10172

Conference Calendar

 

KIERON DEREK PENIGAR,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON INC,

Defendant-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:01-CV-473-A

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

August 20, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Kieron Derek Penigar, Texas prisoner # 721657, appeals the

district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint for lack

of jurisdiction. This court previously dismissed Penigar’s suit

for lack of federal jurisdiction. See Penigar v. Bell Helicopter

Textron, Inc., No. 01-10864 (5th Cir. Dec. 28, 2001)

(unpublished). The law of the case doctrine bars the reexamination of an issue that this court has previously decided. 
No. 02-10172

-2-

See Free v. Abbott Labs. Inc., 164 F.3d 270, 271-72 (5th Cir.

1999). Penigar fails to establish any credible exception to this

doctrine. See id. 

The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a strike

for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons,

103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). In addition, Penigar

accumulated two strikes with the dismissal of the appeal in

Penigar v. Johnson, No. 01-11290 (5th Cir. Feb. 20, 2002)

(unpublished). Because he has accumulated three strikes under

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), Penigar is BARRED from proceeding in forma

pauperis in any civil action or appeal unless he is under

imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(g); Carson v. Johnson, 112 F.3d 818, 819 (5th Cir. 1997).

APPEAL DISMISSED; THREE-STRIKES BAR IMPOSED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Francis Duke, Also Known as Duke Francis, Appellant.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Niehoif, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.
LAKE HAVASULatitude: 34.296Longitude: -114.138Elevation: None

Lake Havasu

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Gutz Peak Site Page...



Gutz Peak

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Gardner Peak Site Page...



Gardner Peak

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Rainbow Canyon Site Page...



Rainbow Canyon

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Bristlecone Trail Site Page...



Bristlecone Trail

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Lee Canyon Site Page...



Lee Canyon

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Fort Valley Site Page...



Fort Valley

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Mormon Mtn Summit Site Page...



Mormon Mtn Summit

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Nutrioso Site Page...



Nutrioso

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Chalender Site Page...



Chalender

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Baker Butte Smt Site Page...



Baker Butte Smt

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Corduroy Flat Site Page...



Corduroy Flat

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Defiance Mines Site Page...



Defiance Mines

Courtesy NRCS - Go to White River Nv Site Page...



White River Nv

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Suu Ranch Site Page...



Suu Ranch

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Kyle Canyon Site Page...



Kyle Canyon

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Hayford Peak Site Page...



Hayford Peak

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Pine Nut Site Page...



Pine Nut

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Sand Hollow Site Page...



Sand Hollow

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Cave Valley Site Page...



Cave Valley

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Vermillion Site Page...



Vermillion

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Baker Butte Site Page...



Baker Butte

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Baldy Site Page...



Baldy

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Harris Flat Site Page...



Harris Flat

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Heber Site Page...



Heber

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Kolob Site Page...



Kolob

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Little Grassy Site Page...



Little Grassy

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Long Flat Site Page...



Long Flat

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Long Valley Jct Site Page...



Long Valley Jct

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Maverick Fork Site Page...



Maverick Fork

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Midway Valley Site Page...



Midway Valley

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Mormon Mountain Site Page...



Mormon Mountain

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Promontory Site Page...



Promontory

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Ward Mountain Site Page...



Ward Mountain

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Webster Flat Site Page...



Webster Flat

Courtesy NRCS - Go to White Horse Lake Site Page...



White Horse Lake

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Snowslide Canyon Site Page...



Snowslide Canyon
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 99.3

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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Asta Funding, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Gary Stern, Chief
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) of the
         Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company
         as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of
         the Company for the periods presented.

Dated: August 11, 2003



                                                      /S/ Gary Stern
                                                      -----------------------
                                                      Gary Stern
                                                      Chief Executive Officer

This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and has not been filed as part of the Report or as a
separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Asta Funding, Inc. and will be retained by Asta Funding, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
MOTION – LR 67 Page 1 of 3

Carl D. Crowell, OSB No. 982049

email: carl@crowell-law.com

CROWELL LAW

P.O. Box 923

Salem, OR 97308

(503) 581-1240

Of attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF OREGON

COBBLER NEVADA, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

DOE-24.21.136.125, 

Defendant.

 Case No.: 3:15-cv-00866-SB

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PERMIT THE 

DEPOSIT OF FUNDS FOR SUPERSEDEAS 

BOND OR SURETY AND STAY 

ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT

(LR 67; FRCP 62(d))

UNOPPOSED

Conferral

The parties have conferred and this motion is unopposed. Defense counsel notes the 

subsequent motion to approve surety pursuant to FRCP 62(d) will likely be opposed.

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PERMIT THE DEPOSIT OF FUNDS FOR SUPERSEDEAS 

BOND OR SURETY AND STAY ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT

I. MOTION

Plaintiff Cobbler Nevada, LLC moves the Court, pursuant to LR 67 for leave to deposit 

$18,347.91 with the Court as a surety for an anticipated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d)

motion to stay execution of the judgment on appeal.

Case 3:15-cv-00866-SB Document 60 Filed 11/16/17 Page 1 of 3
MOTION – LR 67 Page 2 of 3

II. BACKGROUND AND POINTS

Plaintiff-Appellant Cobbler Nevada, LLC (“Cobbler”) is the owner of the rights in the 

motion picture The Cobbler, a notable motion picture released nationally. Thomas Gonzales 

(“Gonzales”) was a defendant in an action alleging Gonzales either personally infringed 

Cobbler’s copyrights by downloading and distributing the motion picture The Cobbler, or is 

liable under a secondary liability theory for consistently and persistently facilitating the 

infringing activity of a third party after hundreds of warnings and notices. ECF 24; First 

Amended Complaint.

Gonzales filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) against the secondary 

liability claim. ECF 27. The District Court dismissed the secondary liability claim with 

prejudice and then sua sponte dismissed the direct liability claim without prejudice with leave to 

amend. ECF 39. Gonzales then petitioned for costs and fees claiming to be the prevailing party. 

ECF 47. The District Court found Gonzales to be the prevailing party and awarded Gonzales 

costs and fees. ECF 55.

Cobbler appealed the award of costs and fees together with the underlying Orders finding 

Gonzales a prevailing party and dismissing Cobbler’s claims. ECF 57. 

Plaintiff Cobbler now moves for leave to permit the deposit of $18,347.91, being 5% 

over the judgment ($17,474.20 + $873.71) to act as a surety in support of a motion pursuant to 

FRCP 62(d). 

///

///

Case 3:15-cv-00866-SB Document 60 Filed 11/16/17 Page 2 of 3
MOTION – LR 67 Page 3 of 3

WHEREFORE Plaintiff requests the Court or the Clerk enter an Order in accord with the 

proposed for submitted form to permit Plaintiff to deposit funds in support of an FRCP 62(d) 

Motion.

Respectfully submitted this day, November 16, 2017.

CROWELL LAW

/s/ Carl D. Crowell

Carl D. Crowell, OSB No. 982049

carl@crowell-law.com

503-581-1240

Of attorneys for the Plaintiff

Case 3:15-cv-00866-SB Document 60 Filed 11/16/17 Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 99.2
                                                                    ------------


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


     In connection with the quarterly report of Classic Bancshares, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I Lisah M.
Frazier, Chief Operation Officer and Chief Financial 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.



Date: August 14, 2002                    /s/ Lisah M. Frazier
      ---------------                   -------------------------------------
                                        Lisah M. Frazier
                                        Chief Operation Officer and
                                        Chief Financial Officer
GCMRC UPDATES 

TWG – April 2012 

GCMRC is currently collaborating with Dr. Steven Martell of the University of British Columbia 

to provide an updated assessment of the humpback chub population in Grand Canyon. The 

update will include data collected from 2009 through 2011 and be in the form of a preliminary 

estimate generated using the Age-Structured Mark-Recapture (ASMR) model of Coggins and 

others. As results from the various humpback chub monitoring programs conducted by GCMRC 

and its cooperators have suggested, model trends indicate the Grand Canyon humpback chub 

adult population remains strong. In addition to the updated ASMR estimate, Dr. Martell is 

working to develop a more flexible length-based model that will minimize potential bias 

associated with age-assignment errors that exists in the current model. Once complete, the 

results of these efforts will be peer reviewed and published as a USGS Open File Report and 

possibly in the peer –reviewed literature. 

GCMRC contact: Scott VanderKooi (svanderkooi@usgs.gov; 928-556-7376) 

Topics proposed by to be included in the June, 2012 meeting of the GCDAMP Technical work 

group include a final report of the genetics study of the Kanab ambersnail conducted by Dr. 

Melanie Culver of the University of Arizona and co-authors. Dr. Culver will attend the meeting 

to present the study findings and answer questions. The peer review of this work is complete 

and the final USGS Open File Report should be finalized in time to distribute at time of the 

presentation. In addition, GCMRC will provide a follow up to the 2009 Fish Protocol Evaluation 

Panel report. We will prepare a response to the recommendations of the panel and discuss how 

they have been implemented to date.
EX-4.2





 Exhibit 4.2 

BURNING ROCK BIOTECH LIMITED. - Class A Ordinary Shares 

(Incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands) 
  

			
	Number	  	Shares
	            	  	                                

 Share Capital is US$50,000 divided into 

(i) 230,000,000 Class A Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.0002 each, 

(ii) 20,000,000 Class B Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.0002 each 

 

			
	THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT	  	 

                          
                                         
                         

		
	is the registered holder of	  	 

                          
                                         
                                     


 Shares in the above-named Company subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association thereof . 

 

			
	EXECUTED for and on behalf of the said Company on	 	                         20        

 by: 
  

			
	DIRECTOR	  	                                      
                  














					
			
	TRANSFER	  		    	
			
	I	  		    	(the Transferor) for the value received
			
	DO HEREBY transfer to	  		    	(the Transferee) the
			
		  		    	shares standing in my name in the
			
	undertaking called Burning Rock Biotech Limited	  		    	
			
	To hold the same unto the Transferee	  		    	
			
	Dated	  		    	
			
	Signed by the Transferor	  		    	
			
	in the presence of:	  		    	
			
	  
	  	  
	    	
	Witness	  	Transferor
# C_2021040EN.01002101.xml

| 5.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 40/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 40/21

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10001 — Microsoft/Zenimax)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 40/10)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Microsoft Corporation (‘Microsoft’, USA), |
| --- | --- |

—

Microsoft Corporation (‘Microsoft’, USA),

| — | ZeniMax Media Inc. (‘ZeniMax’, USA) |
| --- | --- |

—

ZeniMax Media Inc. (‘ZeniMax’, USA)

Microsoft acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of ZeniMax. The concentration is accomplished by way of a merger pursuant to which a newly created Microsoft subsidiary (‘Vault’) will be merged with and into ZeniMax.

2.

| — | for Microsoft: a global technology company. Microsoft offers a wide range of products and services to customers through the following operating segments: (i) Productivity and Business Processes, (ii) Intelligent Cloud and (iii) More Personal Computing. This Transaction primarity concerns Microsoft’s gaming business, part of the More Personal Computing operating segment. Microsoft develops, publishes and distributes games for personal computers (‘PCs’), video game consoles and mobile devices. Microsoft also offers the Xbox gaming console. |
| --- | --- |

—

for Microsoft: a global technology company. Microsoft offers a wide range of products and services to customers through the following operating segments: (i) Productivity and Business Processes, (ii) Intelligent Cloud and (iii) More Personal Computing. This Transaction primarity concerns Microsoft’s gaming business, part of the More Personal Computing operating segment. Microsoft develops, publishes and distributes games for personal computers (‘PCs’), video game consoles and mobile devices. Microsoft also offers the Xbox gaming console.

| — | for ZeniMax: a privately held company. ZeniMax develops and publishes games for PCs, consoles, and mobile devices. |
| --- | --- |

—

for ZeniMax: a privately held company. ZeniMax develops and publishes games for PCs, consoles, and mobile devices.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.10001 — Microsoft/Zenimax

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

---
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2021161EN.01000301.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 3.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/3 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10248 – AP/Lutech)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 161/03)

1.

On 26 April 2021, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2021161EN.01000301-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Apax Partner LLP (‘AP’, UK), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Lutech S.p.A. (‘Lutech’, Italy), indirectly controlled by One Equity Partners (‘OEP’, USA). |

AP acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Lutech.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | for AP: provider of investment advisory services, |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | for Lutech: active in the provision of IT services and solutions and in the resale of IT products, primarily in Italy. |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2021161EN.01000301-E0002) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.10248 – AP/Lutech

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2021161EN.01000301-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2021161EN.01000301-E0002)  [OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2013_366_R_TOC).

---