alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-12585

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket Nos. 2:14-cv-00095-RWS; BK-13-23492-REB

In Re: JAMES JEROME PHILLIPS,

 TAMARA JOHNSTON PHILLIPS,

 Debtors.

__________________________________________________

BANK OF AMERICA, NA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JAMES JEROME PHILLIPS, 

TAMARA JOHNSTON PHILLIPS, 

 Defendants - Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

________________________

(September 29, 2014)

Case: 14-12585 Date Filed: 09/29/2014 Page: 1 of 3 
2

Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM, and COX, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellees, James and Tamara Phillips, are Chapter 7 debtors. They have 

two mortgages on their house. The parties do not dispute that the second lien is 

completely underwater. Appellant, Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank of America”), 

holds the second lien. The Phillipses moved in the bankruptcy court to have Bank 

of America’s lien declared void under Section 506(d) of the Bankruptcy Code. 

The bankruptcy court granted the motion, and the district court affirmed.

Section 506(d) of the Bankruptcy Code provides, in pertinent part, that “[t]o 

the extent that a lien secures a claim against the debtor that is not an allowed 

secured claim, such lien is void.” 11 U.S.C. §506(d). This Court held in Folendore 

v. Small Business Administration, 862 F.2d 1537, 1540 (11th Cir. 1989), that 

Section 506(d) permitted a Chapter 7 debtor to “strip off” a wholly “underwater” 

lien, such as Bank of America’s lien in this case.

The Supreme Court of the United States rejected the reasoning of Folendore

in Dewsnup v. Timm, 502 U.S. 410, 112 S. Ct. 773 (1992), holding that a lien 

partially underwater could not be stripped down to the value of the collateral under 

Section 506(d). Nevertheless, bound by this Court’s “prior panel precedent” rule 

and reasoning that Dewsnup was not “clearly on point” with Folendore, this Court 

in McNeal v. GMAC Mortgage, LLC, 735 F.3d 1263, 1264–65 (11th Cir. 2012), 

Case: 14-12585 Date Filed: 09/29/2014 Page: 2 of 3 
3

declined to follow Dewsnup and other courts that had departed from Folendore. 

The McNeal panel held fast to Folendore and allowed the debtor to strip off an 

underwater junior lien pursuant to Section 506(d).1

 We hold that McNeal and 

Folendore are the law in this circuit with respect to the issue presented here. 

Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district court.

Bank of America concedes that the McNeal holding is binding precedent, 

but seeks further appellate review of the issue. Should Bank of America choose to 

petition this Court for en banc consideration of the issue it raises here, this Court 

should seriously consider the petition.

AFFIRMED

 1 “Although Folendore addressed the 1978 version of the Bankruptcy Code, the 1984 

amendments to the Code did not alter the pertinent language of Section 506(a) or (d).” McNeal, 

735 F.3d at 1265 n.3.

Case: 14-12585 Date Filed: 09/29/2014 Page: 3 of 3
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 14 Received in Senate (RDS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 14

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 7, 2013

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Permitting the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony as part 
   of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of victims of the 
                               Holocaust.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF ROTUNDA FOR HOLOCAUST DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE CEREMONY.

    The rotunda of the Capitol is authorized to be used on April 11, 
2013, for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of 
remembrance of victims of the

              

 Holocaust. Physical preparations for the ceremony shall be carried out 
in accordance with such conditions as the Architect of the Capitol may 
prescribe.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 6, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
ASSIGNMENT OF eSPORTSBET TO eCONNECT

This Agreement states that PowerClick does hereby assign full
ownership of eSportsbet to eConnect and that eConnect agrees to
be responsible to any liabilities that may have been incurred by
PowerClick during its ownership and control of eSportsbet.

eConnect furthermore agrees that no attempt will be made by
eConnect to alter or change any prior eConnect stock and option
arrangements between eConnect and PowerClick.

Dated: January 7, 2000                    eCONNECT


                                          By: /s/  Thomas S. Hughes
                                          Thomas S. Hughes, President

Dated: January 7, 2000                    POWERCLICK


                                          By: /s/  Dominic Einhorn
                                          Dominic Einhorn, President
```
  
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 01/29/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       45,670
COMMITMENTS
   6,440    2,117    3,174   23,691   29,076   33,305   34,366   12,365   11,303

CHANGES FROM 01/22/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        364)
    -237        7      619     -999     -937     -617     -310      981      674

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    14.1      4.6      6.9     51.9     63.7     72.9     75.2     27.1     24.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       56)
       9        7       10       35       26       50       40
```

----

Updated February 1, 2013
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 506 

To authorize legal representation in Bilbrey v. Tyler. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 26, 2012 

Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. MCCONNELL) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To authorize legal representation in Bilbrey v. Tyler. 

Whereas, in the case of Bilbrey v. Tyler, No. 18C04–1111– 

SC–2209, pending in Delaware Circuit Court No. 4, 

Small Claims Division, in Muncie, Indiana, the plaintiff 

has sought testimony from former Senator Evan Bayh 

and an unnamed employee of his former Senate office; 

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the 

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a) 

and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may direct its counsel to represent former Members and former employees of the Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request for 

testimony relating to their official responsibilities; 

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States 

and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the SenVerDate Mar 15 2010 00:13 Jun 27, 2012 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\SR506.ATS SR506

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 506 ATS 

ate may, by the judicial or administrative process, be 

taken from such control or possession but by permission 

of the Senate; 

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or 

in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will take such action as will 

promote the ends of justice consistent with the privileges 

of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate Legal Counsel is author2 ized to represent Senator Bayh and former employees of 

3 his Senate office in Bilbrey v. Tyler and related pro4 ceedings. 

5 SEC. 2. Senator Bayh’s former director of constituent 

6 services, Karen Railing, is authorized to submit a declara7 tion in this case. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1



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



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Opinion Research Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John F. Short, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
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: May 13, 2004 |  | Signed: |  | /s/ John F. Short                   
|                   |  | Name:   |  | John F. Short                       
|                   |  | Title:  |  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Summary of Non-Employee Director Cash Compensation Fees



 Exhibit 10.2 
 Fisher Communications, Inc. 
 Summary of Non-Employee Director Cash
Compensation Fees 
 Fisher Communications, Inc. non-employee directors receive the following cash compensation for their director service,
effective May 9, 2012: 
  

					
	 	  	Amount ($)	 
	 Annual Board Retainer
	  			
	 Chairman
	  	 	80,000	  
	 All other directors
	  	 	30,000	  
	 Additional Annual Committee Chair Retainers
	  			
	 Audit Committee
	  	 	10,000	  
	 Nominating & Corporate Governance Committee
	  	 	5,000	  
	 Compensation Committee
	  	 	7,500	  
	 Board Meeting Fees (per meeting attended)
	  	 	1,000	  
	 Committee Meeting Fees (per meeting attended)
	  	 	1,000
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       2,370,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,745,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   369,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,722,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,671,000
<PP&E>                                       3,914,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,405,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,906,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,836,000
<BONDS>                                        690,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        84,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,296,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,906,000
<SALES>                                      9,636,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            13,294,000
<CGS>                                        5,523,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,523,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            11,878,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               150,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              72,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,804,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,804,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,804,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.45)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.45)


</TABLE>
Thedrick EDWARDS, Petitioner, v. Darrel VANNOY, Warden.

No. 19-5807.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 4, 2020

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* granted, and the petition for writ of certiorari to the United *2738States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted limited to the following question: Whether this Court's decision in *Ramos* v. *Louisiana* , 590 U.S. ---- (2020), applies retroactively to case on federal collateral review.
Exhibit
10.4


 


Addendum II



to



Quota Share Reinsurance Agreement

(Effective January 1, 2002)



between



COAST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY (“Coast National”)

SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY (“Security National”)

BRISTOL WEST INSURANCE COMPANY (“Bristol”)

BRISTOL WEST CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY (“Bristol”)

(hereinafter called the “Company”)



and



THE PARTICIPANTS SUBSCRIBING TO THE RESPECTIVE

INTERESTS AND LIABILITIES AGREEMENTS TO WHICH THIS AGREEMENT

IS ATTACHED

(hereinafter called the “Reinsurer”)


 


It is understood and
agreed by the parties hereto that effective September 1, 2003 the second
paragraph in Article XIV is amended to read as follows:


 


It is agreed that the
Maximum Subject Net Premium for Security National for Underwriting Years 2002,
2003 and 2004, shall equal $50,000,000, $65,000,000 and $80,000,000
respectively unless otherwise agreed to by the Reinsurer.  However, for purposes of determining the
Maximum Subject Net Premium for Security National, the Florida “credit
business” premium shall not be included.


 


Nothing herein contained shall alter, vary or extend
any provision or condition of this Contract other than as above stated.


 

















 


In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have
caused this Addendum II to be signed in duplicate by their duly authorized
representatives.


 


 


	
  Anaheim, California,
  this             
  day of
               in
  the year 2003.

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ Alexis S. Oster

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Coast National
  Insurance Company

  	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  Davie, Florida, this
               day
  of             
  in the year 2003.

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ Alexis S. Oster

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Security National
  Insurance Company

  	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  Philadelphia,
  Pennsylvania, this
               day
  of             
  in the year 2003.

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ Alexis S. Oster

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Bristol West Insurance
  Company

  	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  Independence, Ohio,
  this             
  day of             
  in the year 2003.

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ Alexis S. Oster

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Bristol West Casualty
  Insurance Company

  	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  New York, New York,
  this             
  day of
               in
  the year 2003.

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ Robert J. Coords

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  National Union Fire
  Insurance Company

  of Pittsburgh, PA
##### Form 10-Q Table of Contents

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 of SeaBright Insurance Holdings, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Joseph S. De Vita,
Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
as adopted pursuant to §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.

Dated: August 14, 2006

| |  |  |                                                                                                                       
| |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |  | /s/ Joseph S. De VitaJoseph S. De Vita
          Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officerand Assistant Secretary

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic
version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to SeaBright Insurance Holdings, Inc. and will
be retained by SeaBright Inhsurance Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S

N O . A P - 7 6 , 5 5 6

E X P A R T E R A U L P I N A H E R R E R A , A p p l i c a n t

O N A P P L I C A T I O N F O R A W R I T O F H A B E A S C O R P U S C A U S E N O . 6 1 1 4 1
- 2 4 3
- 2 I N T H E 2 4 3 J U D I C I A L D I S T R I C T C O U R T R D F R O M E L P A S O C O U N T Y

P e r c u r i a m . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Crim i n al P ro ce dure, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleade d g uilty to attempted murder and orig inally rec eived a ten-y ear probate d sentenc e. His probation was later revoke d, and he was sentenc ed to ten y ear s’ imprisonment. He did not appea l his conviction. Applicant contends, inter alia , that his plea was involuntary beca use neither trial counsel nor the t rial court advised him of the immigr ation conseque nces of his guilty plea. We rema

nded thi s application to the trial c ourt for f indings of f

act a nd conclusions of law

.2

The trial court pointed out on rema nd that Applicant has previously soug ht habea s relief on the g rounds that he wa s not pr operly admonished as to the immigra tion consequenc es of his plea

. Howeve r, at the time of his first writ applica t i o n , Ap p l icant had not been subject to deporta tion proce eding s. At the time he filed this, his second application, Applicant had been deporte d, and is

curr ently serving a fe dera l sentence for illeg al re -entry
. Relief is g rante d. The j u d gm en t i n Cause No. 61141-243-2 in the 243rd J udicial District Court of El Paso County is se t a side, and Applicant is rema nded to the custody

of the sher iff of El Paso County

to answer

the cha rg es as se t out in the indictment. Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Dep a r tm e n t o f Cr im in a l Ju s tic e–Corre ctional I nstitut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Deliver ed: May

11, 2011 Do Not Publish
Christopher PEYTON, Petitioner, v. Ravonne SIMS, Warden, et al.

No. 19-7459.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 30, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Kentucky denied.
Danny D. BISSONETTE, petitioner, v. Robert DOOLEY, Warden, et al.

No. 18-8791.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 23, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
|       |  |                |  |       
|------ |  | -------------- |  | ------
|NUMBER |  |                |  | SHARES
|REPT.  |  | [REPTRON LOGO] |  |       



Reptron Electronics,
Inc.



INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA



|                     |  |              |  |                                    
|-------------------- |  | ------------ |  | -----------------------------------
|                     |  |              |  | SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS
|                     |  |             
|                     |  | COMMON STOCK |  | CUSIP 76026W 20 8                  
|                     |  |             
|This Certifies That: |  |              |  |                                    
|                     |  |             
|Is The Owner Of:     |  |              |  |                                    



FULLY PAID AND
NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OF $.01 PAR VALUE EACH OF



Reptron Electronics, Inc.



transferable on the books of the
Corporation in person or by attorney upon surrender of this certificate duly endorsed or assigned. This certificate and the shares represented hereby are subject to the laws of the State of Florida, and to the Articles of Incorporation and By-laws
of the Corporation, as now or hereafter amended. This certificate is not valid until countersigned by the Transfer Agent.

WITNESS the
facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers.



|          |  |                                     |  |                                      
|--------- |  | ----------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated:    |  |                                     |  | COUNTERSIGNED:                       
|          |  |                                    
|          |  | REPTRON ELECTRONICS, INC. CORPORATE |  | WACHOVIA BANK                        
|          |  | SEAL                                |  | NEW YORK, NY & CHARLOTTE, NC         
|          |  | 2004                                |  | TRANSFER AGENT                       
|          |  |                                    
|          |  | FLORIDA                             |  | BY:                                  
|          |  |                                     |  | AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE                 
|          |  |                                    
|SECRETARY |  |                                     |  | PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
```
 
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 02/11/14                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       66,874
COMMITMENTS
  16,586    8,379    2,273   30,424   42,230   49,283   52,882   17,591   13,992

CHANGES FROM 02/04/14 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -2,951)
     196   -1,265     -321   -4,016   -1,242   -4,141   -2,828    1,190     -123

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    24.8     12.5      3.4     45.5     63.1     73.7     79.1     26.3     20.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       79)
      28       12       13       33       26       65       48
```

----

Updated February 14, 2014
Charles QUATRINE, Jr., Petitioner, v. Mary BERGHUIS, Warden.

No. 19-5381.

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.