alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

Wniteb ~tate5 QCourt of ~peaI5 

for tbe jf eberaI QCircuit 

ANNE WILSON PARHAM 

(ALSO KNOWN AS ANNE L. WILSON AND ANNE W. 

PARHAM) AND LAWRENCE NEIL PARHAM 

(ALSO KNOWN AS LARRY N. PARHAM), 

Plaintiffs·Appellees, 

v. 

SUZANNE HARRIS-ONAXIS AND 

LEE HARRIS-ONAXIS, 

Defendants-Appellants. 

2012-1519 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of Georgia in case no. 12·CV·0079, 

Judge William C. O'Kelley. 

ORDER 

The court considers whether this appeal should be 

dismissed or transferred. 

Suzanne Harris-Onaxis and Lee Harris·Onaxis appeal 

from an order of the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of Georgia which affirmed a bankruptcy 

judge's decision that the debt was not dischargeable. This 

court is a court of limited jurisdiction, which does not 

appear to include jurisdiction in this matter. 28 U.S.C. § 
ANNE WILSON PARHAM V. SUZANNE HARRIS-ONAXIS 2 

1295. The court notes that the notice of appeal states 

that Suzanne Harris-Onaxis and Lee Harris-Onaxis 

"appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit." 

The district court transmitted the notice of appeal to this 

court. 

Accordingly, 

IT Is ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The parties are directed to respond within 14 days 

from the date of filing of this order concerning whether 

this petition should be transferred to the United States 

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 163l. 

(2) The briefing scheduled is stayed. 

AUG 022012 

Date 

FOR THE COURT 

lsI Jan Horbaly 

Jan Horbaly 

Clerk 

cc: Charles Neil Kelley, Jr., Esq. 

Douglas Lowman Henry, Esq. 

s26 

u.s. couJ~'f,9P£AlS FOR 

THE FEllERAL CIRCUIT 

AUG 022012 

JANHORBAlV 

ClERK
(85 South. 924)

#### UNION SPRINGS GUANO CO. v. McLEAN & STEPHENS.

(4 Div. 843.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

Feb. 12, 1920.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Bullock County; J. S. Williams, Judge.

E. L. Blue, of Union Springs, for appellant.

G. E. Jones, of Clayton, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed by agreement.
|Exhibit 99.1


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


In connection with the
Annual Report of Liberté Investors Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K for the period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Donald J.
Edwards, President and 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 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; 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/ DONALD J. EDWARDS

Donald J. Edwards
President and Chief Executive Officer
September 27, 2002
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                  5


<S>                                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                          Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                             Jun-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                               Jun-30-1999

<CASH>                                                           2,557
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                   37,549
<ALLOWANCES>                                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                                      4,823
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                49,560
<PP&E>                                                          91,634
<DEPRECIATION>                                                  38,447
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 171,417
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                           26,212
<BONDS>                                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<COMMON>                                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                                      17,093
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   171,417
<SALES>                                                        103,099
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               103,099
<CGS>                                                           60,700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                   60,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                32,325
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                               6,496
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                  3,578
<INCOME-TAX>                                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                              3,578
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     3,578
<EPS-BASIC>                                                    0.000
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                    0.000


</TABLE>
SECOND DIVISION

ANDREWS, P. J.,

MCFADDEN and RAY, JJ.

NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be

physically received in our clerk’s office within ten

days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed.

http://www.gaappeals.us/rules

March 22, 2016

In the Court of Appeals of Georgia

A14A0979. SHIRLEY v. THE STATE.

RAY, Judge.

In Shirley v. State, 330 Ga. App. 424 (765 SE2d 491) (2014), this Court

affirmed the trial court’s order denying Michael Scott Shirley’s motion to suppress

evidence related to images of child pornography seized from his home, finding that

the application for a search warrant was supported by probable cause. In Shirley v.

State, 297 Ga. 722 (777 SE2d 444) (2015), the Supreme Court reversed, determining

that the warrant application was insufficient to support probable cause and that

Shirley’s motion to suppress should have been granted. Accordingly, we vacate our

earlier opinion, adopt the Supreme Court’s opinion as our own, and reverse the

judgment of the trial court.

Judgment reversed. Andrews, P. J., and McFadden, J., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2
                                                                    ------------

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

I, Walter Tatum, Chief Financial Officer of Cyberads, Inc. (the "company") do
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 u.s.c. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the sarbanes-oxley act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of the Company for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:  January 30, 2006
                                          /s/ WALTER TATUM
                                          ----------------------
                                          Walter Tatum
                                          Chief Financial Officer
#### Rishard Lewis GETER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer TAHARRA, Jailer, Spartanburg County Detention Center, Defendant-Appellee, and Larry Powers, Warden, Spartanburg County Detention Center; Teresa Speller, Captain, Spartanburg County Detention Center, Defendants.

No. 10-7734.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 19, 2011.

Decided: May 3, 2011.

Rishard Lewis Geter, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Todd Darwin, Holcombe, Bomar, Gunn & Bradford, PA, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Rishard Lewis Geter appeals a jury verdict in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action against Officer Taharra of the Spartan-burg County Detention Center. On appeal, Geter challenges several rulings of the district court and alleges the ineffectiveness of the attorney appointed to assist him. We affirm.

We review evidentiary rulings by the district court for an abuse of discretion. *266
      *United States v. Basham,*561 F.3d 302, 325 (4th Cir.2009). An abuse of discretion occurs when “the district court judge acted arbitrarily or irrationally in admitting [or excluding] evidence.” *Id.*at 326 (internal quotation marks omitted). Having reviewed the informal briefs of the parties and the record before us, we perceive no such abuse of discretion in the challenged rulings of the district court.

Geter also challenges the effectiveness of counsel. However, there is no right to appointment of counsel in a civil case, and allegations of appointed counsel’s ineffectiveness are not sufficient to raise a valid claim for relief on appeal. *See Glick v. Henderson,*855 F.2d 536, 541 (8th Cir. 1988); *Sanchez v. United States Postal Serv.,*785 F.2d 1236, 1237 (5th Cir.1986). Therefore, these claims entitle Geter to no relief.

Geter also alleges that he has new evidence that entitles him to a new trial. However, the material submitted to the court is not new, and therefore warrants no retrial. *United States v. Custis,*988 F.2d 1355, 1359 (4th Cir.1993) (“The standard for granting a new trial is well established in this circuit: [first,] the evidence must be, in fact, newly discovered, i.e., discovered since the trial.”).

Geter’s claims entitle him to no relief, and we therefore affirm the judgment of the district court imposed on the jury verdict. 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 32.2

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 on Form 10-Q of Active Power, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending June 30,
2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John K. Penver, Vice President of Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary 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, to 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, 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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.



/s/ John K. PenverJohn K. PenverVice President of Finance, Chief Financial
Officer and SecretaryJuly 27, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           4,663
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                27,883
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      2,707
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          16,501
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            16,508
<LOANS>                                        124,079
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,138
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 198,417
<DEPOSITS>                                     173,262
<SHORT-TERM>                                     6,100
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,025
<LONG-TERM>                                      5,418
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,612
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 198,417
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  4,886
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  570
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   266
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,722
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,488
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,823
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,899
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      150
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 138
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,303
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    994
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         994
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       591
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.88
<LOANS-NON>                                        361
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   977
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        1
<RECOVERIES>                                        12
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,138
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,138
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### *In re*TIBBLE, Douglas Clair

(MR 21029)

Naperville, IL

Order of the Court:

The petition by the Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission to impose discipline on consent pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 762(b) is allowed, and respondent Douglas Clair Tibbie is suspended from the practice of law for 30 days. Suspension effective October 12, 2006. Respondent Douglas Clair Tibbie shall reimburse the Client Protection Program Trust Fund for any Client Protection payments arising from his conduct prior to the termination of the period of suspension.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5924 

To repeal section 929I of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2010 

Mr. ISSA (for himself, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. MICA, Mr. 

DUNCAN, Mr. TURNER, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. BILBRAY, Mr. JORDAN of 

Ohio, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. SCHOCK, Mr. 

LUETKEMEYER, Mr. SHUSTER, and Mr. JONES) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To repeal section 929I of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act. 

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 ‘‘SEC Freedom of Infor5 mation Restoration Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL. 

7 Section 929I of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform 

8 and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111–203) is 

9 repealed, and the provisions of law amended or repealed 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5924 IH

1 by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act had 

2 not been enacted. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 21, 2015. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, December 21, 2015 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A16I0085. WECARE TLC, LLC v. TERESA KENERLEY.
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 14CV0363
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>N'Tia Utak, Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>John P. Savoca, for appellant.Westchester County District Attorney (Brian R. Pouliot and William C. Milaccio of counsel), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from judgments of the Justice Court of the Town of Mount Pleasant, Westchester County (Nicolas C. Maselli, Jr., J.), rendered October 6, 2016. The judgments convicted defendant, upon jury verdicts, of assault in the third degree, criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation, and endangering the welfare of a child, respectively, and imposed sentences.</p><p>ORDERED that the judgments of conviction are affirmed.</p><p>Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of assault in the third degree (Penal Law ยง 120.00 [1]), criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation (Penal Law ยง 121.11), and endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law ยง 260.10 [1]). </p><p>To the extent that defendant now contends that the evidence of guilt was legally insufficient, we find that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution (<i>see People v Contes</i>, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt of assault in the third degree, criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation, and endangering the welfare of a child (<a href="../2018/2018_06255.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Cepero</i>, 164 AD3d 1465</a>, 1466 [2018]; <a href="../2017/2017_05981.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Van Praag</i>, 153 AD3d 559</a>, 560 [2017]; <i>People v Virapen</i>, 147 AD3d <font color="FF0000">[*2]</font>981, 982 [2017]; <a href="../2016/2016_26145.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Tumminello</i>, 53 Misc 3d 34</a> [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th &amp; 10th Jud Dists 2016]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power (<i>see</i> CPL 470.15 [5]; <a href="../2007/2007_09814.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Danielson</i>, 9 NY3d 342</a>, 348-349 [2007]), while according great deference to the trier of fact's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear their testimony, observe their demeanor, and assess their credibility (<a href="../2006/2006_08641.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Lane</i>, 7 NY3d 888</a>, 890 [2006]; <i>People v Mateo</i>, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; <i>People v Bleakley</i>, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]), we find that the verdicts were not against the weight of the evidence (<a href="../2006/2006_08640.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Romero</i>, 7 NY3d 633</a> [2006]).</p><p>Accordingly, the judgments of conviction are affirmed.</p><p>RUDERMAN, J.P., TOLBERT and GARGUILO, JJ., concur.</p><br><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: January 10, 2019<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the
incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-211254, 333-165418,
333-157685, 333-149203, 333-145074, 333-139555,
333-121584, and Form F-3 No.333-210203) of Sanofi of our reports dated March 6, 2018, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Sanofi and its subsidiaries and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Sanofi and its subsidiaries, included in this Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the
year ended December 31, 2017.

Neuilly-sur-Seine, France

March 6, 2018

PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit



|                  |  |                    
|----------------- |  | -------------------
|/s/ Philippe Vogt |  | /s/ Stéphane Basset
- Home

# United States Capitol Police Memorial Fund

The United States Capitol Police (USCP) Memorial Fund was established by Congress as the official means for the public to support the families of USCP officers killed in the line of duty, and/or officers who have sustained serious line-of-duty injuries.

*Contributions to the Fund are tax deductible.*

**Donations to the Fund, may be made using the secure U.S. Government payment portal.**

**Donate Now**

Checks may be written out to the "United States Capitol Police Memorial Fund" and mailed to:

**United States Capitol Police***Attn: Office of Financial Management*119 D Street, NEWashington, DC 20510

## History of the Fund

Congress established the United States Capitol Police Memorial Fund (P.L. 105-233) following the tragic shooting of two USCP officers as they defended the U.S. Capitol from a lone gunman on July 24, 1998.

Two decades later, two officers were seriously injured while protecting Members of Congress during an active shooter incident on June 14, 2017. After that attack, Congress expanded the Memorial Fund (P.L. 115-45) to allow financial support to employees who sustained serious line-of-duty injuries, or to the families of employees killed in the line of duty.

Today, contributions to the Memorial Fund continue to provide generous support to the families of our fallen officers, as well as to United States Capitol Police employees who are seriously injured in the line of duty.

## The Department

              - Our Mission
              - Our History
              - Executive Team
              - United States Capitol Police Memorial Fund
              - Office of Inspector General
              - Bureaus and Offices
              - Human Capital Strategic Plan
              - Oversight
              - USCP Department Strategic Plan