alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The following article first appeared in

The American

BANKRUPTCY

LAW JOURNAL

A Quarterly Journal of the National Conference of

Bankruptcy Judges

It is reprinted with the permission of the copyright holder. In 2002 the ABLJ adopted a 

peer review policy, making it the only peer-reviewed journal focusing on bankruptcy 

matters. It is also the only bankruptcy law journal edited exclusively by sitting

bankruptcy judges. If you are interested in submitting a manuscript to the ABLJ for 

publication consideration, please consult the Submission Guidelines available at 76 AM. 

BANKR. L.J. 709-10 (2002). With an annual subscription price of only $65, you owe it to 

yourself to subscribe to the ABLJ. New subscription requests should be sent to:

Ms. Chris Molick

Executive Director

National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges

235 Secret Cove Dr.

Lexington, SC 29072

************************************************************************

Please add my name to the discerning bankruptcy professionals who subscribe to The 

American Bankruptcy Law Journal. 

Name: __________________________________________________________________

Mailing address: __________________________________________________________

 __________________________________________________________

 __________________________________________________________

Phone: _________________________________________________________________

I enclose the following form of payment:

 __ Check in the amount of $65

 __ I authorize you to charge my credit card account (circle one): Visa MasterCard

 Account Number: _____ _____ _____ _____ Expiration Date:

Signature of Account Holder: _______________________________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                  5

       
<S>                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                         Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                            Jun-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                              Jun-30-1998

<CASH>                                                         28,841
<SECURITIES>                                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                  28,721
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                     4,563
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               67,084
<PP&E>                                                         73,262
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 29,010
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                155,325
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                          19,820
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                            1
<OTHER-SE>                                                     16,917
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                  155,325
<SALES>                                                        85,955
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               85,955
<CGS>                                                          53,070
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                  53,070
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               27,246
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                              5,116
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                   523
<INCOME-TAX>                                                      312
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                               211
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                                      211
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                   0.000
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                   0.000
        
 

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Samuel Osborne, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.), rendered January 5, 1987, convicting him of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree and attempted grand larceny in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, who has interposed no challenge to his plea of guilty, acknowledged during the plea allocution that no promise was being made concerning sentence and that he understood he could receive a sentence of up to seven years. He therefore cannot be heard to complain that an alleged off-the-record "promise” by the prosecutor of a 2- to 4-year term induced his plea *(People v Selikoff,*35 NY2d 227, *cert denied*419 US 1122). The defendant’s present claim that he was denied effective assistance of counsel is not established by the record and should have been raised by a collateral or postjudgment motion *(cf., People v Brown,*45 NY2d 852). Finally, we do not find that the sentence imposed is harsh or excessive *(People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Eiber, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 99


                            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 Secured Data, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Art Malone, Jr.,
Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company.


Art Malone, Jr.
----------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer, President
and Chief Financial Officer
May 16, 2003
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

The Federal Maritime Commission hereby gives notice that the following Ocean Transportation Intermediary licenses have been revoked pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. 1718) and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, effective on the corresponding dates shown below: 

*License Number:*                     16629N.                 

*Name:*                     Cargomania International, Inc.                 

*Address:*                     161-15 Rockaway Blvd., Suite 102, Jamaica, NY 11434.                 

*Date Revoked:*                     March 15, 2001.                 

*Reason:*                     Failed to maintain a valid bond.                

*License Number:*                     13141N.                 

*Name:*                     North Star Airlines, Inc. d/b/a North Star Ocean Services.                 

*Address:*                     Cargo Bldg., 68 JFK International Airport, Jamaica, NY 11430.                 

*Date Revoked:*                     March 17, 2001.                 

*Reason:*                     Failed to maintain a valid bond.                 

Sandra L. Kusumoto, 

Director, Bureau of Consumer Complaints and Licensing. 

[FR Doc. 01-10288 Filed 4-25-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Spectrum Commodity L.P. and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                      21,889,321
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  280,631<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,874,810<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,874,810<F3>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,430,191<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,186,290
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                243,901
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            243,901
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   243,901
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Receivables include interest receivable of $88,898 and
subscriptions receivable of $191,733.
<F2>In addition to cash and receivables, total assets include net
unrealized loss on open contracts of $295,142.
<F3>Liabilities include redemptions payable of $412,633, accrued
brokerage fees of $82,977 and accrued management fees
of $45,096.
<F4>Total revenue includes realized trading revenue of $1,487,013,
net change in unrealized of $(837,570) and interest income of
$780,748.
</FN>



</TABLE>
#### Catherine Aubry, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Donald Aubry, Deceased, Respondent, v General Accident Insurance, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Order affirmed with costs for reasons stated at Supreme Court, Rath, J.

All concur, except Balio, J., who dissents and votes to reverse and grant judgment, in accordance with the following memorandum.

Balio, J. (dissenting).

I respectfully dissent because there are no factual issues precluding summary judgment.

Aubry Transportation, Inc. arranged for Wayne Felts to perform welding work on the axle of its truck. The complaint alleges that Donald Aubry was present during the welding operations, that Aubry’s son lost consciousness when he inhaled poisonous fumes and that upon seeing his son become ill, Aubry suffered a heart attack and died. Plaintiff, the administratrix of Aubry’s estate, sued the corporation, claiming that it was negligent in hiring and in permitting Felts to perform the welding work in an inadequately ventilated area. General Accident Insurance, the corporation’s insurer, disclaimed coverage and refused to defend upon the grounds that its policy excluded coverage for an injury suffered by an insured’s employee in the course of employment and for any obligation existing under the Workers’ Compensation Law. The insurer also claimed that plaintiff failed to give prompt notice of the incident as mandated by the policy. Plaintiff then commenced the subject action, seeking a declaration that General Accident had a duty to defend. General Accident appeals from an order denying its motion for summary judgment.

Plaintiff concedes that Donald Aubry was the sole employee of Aubry Transportation, Inc. If, as alleged in the complaint, the corporation was negligent in hiring Felts and in permitting the welding operation to proceed under the circumstances *974causing injury and death, the corporation’s acts were performed by the deceased in the course of his employment. Because the record demonstrates that a policy exclusion applies and that there is no coverage for the damages sought in the complaint, defendant is entitled to a judgment declaring that it had no duty to defend *(New York Cas. Ins. Co. v Ward,*139 AD2d 922; *see also, Marine Midland Servs. Corp. v Kosoff & Sons,*60 AD2d 767, 768). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rath, J. — summary judgment.) Present— Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Jay Meilstrup, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of GameTech International, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin 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 andprocedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: September 14, 2006           /S/ Jay M. Meilstrup             Jay M. Meilstrup
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-12-0000032 23-MAY-2014 08:59 AM
EXHIBIT 21

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF
LAZARE KAPLAN INTERNATIONAL INC.

|                                         |  |                        
|---------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|NAME                                     |  | ORGANIZED
UNDER LAWS OF
|                                         |  |                        
|                                         |  |                        
|Lazare
 Kaplan Europe Inc.               |  | Delaware               
|Lazare
 Kaplan Belgium, N.V.             |  | Belgium                
|Lazare
 Kaplan Africa Inc.               |  | Delaware               
|Lazare
 Kaplan Japan Inc. (Tokyo Branch) |  | Japan                  
|Pegasus
 Overseas Ltd.                   |  | Bahamas                
|Pegasus
 Overseas LLC                    |  | Delaware               
|POCL Bvba                                |  | Belgium                
|POCL, N.V                                |  | Belgium                
|Bellataire
 Inc.                         |  | Delaware               

---
#### Stephen W. HUDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 10-1795.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 4, 2011.

Decided: May 19, 2011.

Henry W. McLaughlin, III, Law Office of Henry McLaughlin, P.C., Richmond, VA, for Appellant. Harry M. Johnson, III, William P. Childress, III, Hunton & Williams, LLP, Richmond, VA, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

*311Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Stephen W. Hudson appeals the district court’s order granting Bank of America, N.A.’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss his action, brought pursuant to the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1601-1667f (West 2009 & Supp.2010). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. *See Hudson v. Bank of America, N.A.,*No. 3:09-cv-462, 2010 WL 2365588 (E.D. Va. June 11, 2010). 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
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION**


**PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**


**(SUBSECTIONS
      (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350,**


**CHAPTER
      63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Intermec, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the period ended April 1, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Larry D. Brady, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
      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/
                Larry D. BradyLarry
                D. Brady*Chief
                Executive Officer*May
                7, 2007
**Exhibit 23.2**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 of sanofi-aventis, dated February 13, 2008 (No. 333-149203), August 2, 2007 (No. 333-145074), December 21, 2006 (No. 333-139555), June 3, 2005 (No.333-125490), December 23, 2004 (No. 333-121584 and 333-121583) and July 22, 2003 (No. 333-107238), of our reports dated March 3, 2009 relating to the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting, which appear in this annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2008. 

Neuilly-sur-Seine, France 

March 3, 2009 

PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit

Catherine Pariset                    Philippe Vogt
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: GRAND JURY SUBPOENA, Dated 

March 21, 2018, 

______________________________ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

DOE, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 18-50321 

D.C. No. 2:18-cm-00771-UA-1 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

John A. Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted December 4, 2018

Pasadena, California

Before: D.W. NELSON and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and PRATT,** District 

Judge.

Doe appeals the district court’s order holding her in civil contempt for 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the 

Southern District of Iowa, sitting by designation.

FILED

DEC 28 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

refusing to produce records of her foreign bank activity for the years 2011 through 

2016 as sought by a federal grand jury subpoena duces tecum. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm. 

Doe asserts that the spousal testimonial privilege protects her from 

producing documents responsive to the subpoena because the grand jury is 

currently investigating possible federal tax crimes committed by her husband.1 For 

the spousal testimonial privilege to apply, “the anticipated testimony ‘[must] in 

fact be adverse’ to the nonwitness spouse.” United States v. Van Cauwenberghe,

827 F.2d 424, 431 (9th Cir. 1987) (citation omitted); see also United States v. 

Fomichev, 899 F.3d 766, 771 (9th Cir. 2018) (“[T]he witness-spouse alone has a 

privilege to refuse to testify adversely.”) (emphasis added) (citation omitted). 

Here, “the testimonial aspect of [Doe’s] response to a subpoena duces tecum does 

nothing more than establish the existence, authenticity, and custody” of any 

responsive foreign bank account records. United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 

40–41 (2000). Because this bare testimonial aspect of Doe’s act of production

does not itself adversely affect her husband’s case, Doe is not relieved of her 

obligation to produce foreign bank account records over which she has care, 

 

1 Although Doe also raised claims of privilege under the Fifth Amendment, and the 

marital communications privilege, before the district court, these arguments were 

not raised on appeal and are therefore waived. Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 

1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[O]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening 

brief are deemed waived.”). 
3 

custody, or control. 

AFFIRMED.