alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE OF OHIO ex rel. PLUMMER v. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JACKSON COUNTY, OHIO, et al.

No. 11956.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

June 24, 1953.

*678No counsel appeared for any party.

Before SIMONS, Chief Judge, and ALLEN, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant has filed a petition for an alternative writ of mandamus entitling him to his “ ‘Indictment, Journal Entry, Certify Of Sentence, and Minute Book, testimony material,’ of the Court proceedings, Case No. 6277, as recorded and filed on or about the 23rd. day of February A.D. 1935.” Appellant says that in 1935 he was sentenced to the penitentiary for life by the Court of Common Pleas of Jackson County, Ohio, having been found guilty of murder in the first degree. We assume that the records sought herein are those of the murder case in question. He has also filed a motion to be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in this mandamus action and to be assigned counsel.

This court would be authorized to issue the writ of mandamus in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. McClellan v Garland, 217 U.S. 268, 30 S.Ct. 501, 54 L.Ed. 762; Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Co. v. Rellstab, 276 U.S. 1, 5, 48 S.Ct. 203, 72 L.Ed. 439. The test of appellate jurisdiction in the exercise or aid of which the Courts of Appeals are authorized to issue writs of mandamus is the existence of that jurisdiction, not its prior invocation. Barber Asphalt Paving Company v. Morris, 8 Cir., 132 F. 945. In that case the Circuit Court of Appeals issued a writ of mandamus ordering the district judge holding the Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota to proceed to try a controversy which was pending in that court and of which the Circuit Court of Appeals had appellate jurisdiction. On the other hand, a writ of mandamus will not be issued ordering the District Court to dismiss a case on the ground that no jurisdiction has been acquired over the defendant where the only question involved is reviewable on appeal only in the Supreme Court of the United States and not in the Circuit Court of Appeals. United States ex rel. Butterworth & Lowe v. Sessions, 6 Cir., 205 F. 502. So far as we are able to learn from the meager petition herein, the case of which review is sought is a judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Jackson County, Ohio, which has been in effect since 1935. Securing the court records for such a review is, of course, essential. But this court has no jurisdiction to review the judgment of the state court and it cannot issue a writ of mandamus as an incident to a power that it does not possess.

It would be futile under the circumstances to allow the motions to proceed in forma pauperis and to assign counsel. These motions are denied and the petition for alternative writ of mandamus is dismissed.
Exhibit 15.1

February 5, 2009

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, DC 20549

Commissioners:

We are aware that our report dated February 5, 2009 on our review of interim financial information of Apollo Investment
Corporation for the three and nine month periods ended December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007 and included in the Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2008 is incorporated by reference in
its Registration Statement on Form N-2 dated September 10, 2007.



|                              
|------------------------------
|Very truly yours,             
|                              
|/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
**Exhibit 32.2**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theQuarterly Report of B&G Foods, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ending July 1, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert C. Cantwell, Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adoptedpursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1)           The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)           The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.
| /s/ Robert C. Cantwell  |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Robert C. Cantwell      |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |
| August 3, 2006          |   |

* *

*A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retainedby the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.*

 

----
STATE v. MORGAN.

No. COA05-373.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed December 20, 2005.

Certification Date January 9, 2006.

Appeal from Wake (03CRS114124)

Case without published opinion. No error.
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statements on
Form  S-8  (File  Numbers  333-16359,   333-92549,   333-119394,   333-139026,
333-133831,  333-148127,  and 333-145790) of Centrue Financial  Corporation of
our report  dated March 12, 2008 with   respect to the  consolidated  financial
statements of Centrue Financial  Corporation and the effectiveness of internal
control over financial  reporting,  which report appears in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K of Centrue Financial  Corporation for the year ended December 31,
2007.

| |                                                              
| | -------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Crowe Chizek and Company LLC
Crowe Chizek and Company LLC

Oak Brook, Illinois
March 12, 2008

---
# L_2012347EN.01000801.xml

| 15.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 347/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 347/8

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1204/2012

of 14 December 2012

approving amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Castelmagno (PDO))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 9(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, and having regard to Article 17(2) thereof, Italy’s application for approval of amendments to the specification for the name ‘Castelmagno’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, and having regard to Article 17(2) thereof, Italy’s application for approval of amendments to the specification for the name ‘Castelmagno’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | A statement of objection substantiated under Article 7(3)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 was notified to the Commission by Luxembourg. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A statement of objection substantiated under Article 7(3)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 was notified to the Commission by Luxembourg.

| (3) | By letter of 23 September 2010, the Commission invited the interested parties to hold appropriate consultations. No agreement was reached between the parties within six months of that date. However, Luxembourg withdrew its objection by letter of 2 August 2012, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

By letter of 23 September 2010, the Commission invited the interested parties to hold appropriate consultations. No agreement was reached between the parties within six months of that date. However, Luxembourg withdrew its objection by letter of 2 August 2012,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 24 December 2009 regarding the name contained in the Annex to this Regulation are hereby approved.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 14 December 2012.

For the Commission

The President

José Manuel BARROSO

---

(1)  
  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 320, 24.12.2009, p. 27.

2

---

ANNEX

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.3.   Cheeses

ITALY

Castelmagno (PDO)

---
STATE v. Tony Wayne DORTON.

No. 514P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 3, 2005.

William B. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Kristy M. Newton, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th day of September 2005 by Defendant for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 3rd day of November 2005."
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA No. 4 99 P A1 2 FILED 8 NOVEMBER 2013 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

v. WAYNE ANTHONY HUSS

On discretionary review pursuant to N.C.G.S. ' 7A

- 31 of a unanimous decision of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 734 S.E.2d 612 (2012), reversing judgments entered on 1 July 2011 by Judge Beverly T. Beal in Superior Court, Lincoln County. Heard in the Supreme Court on 14 October 2013.
Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Sherri Horner Lawrence , Assistant Attorney General, for the State

- appellant. Staples S. Hughes, Appellate Defender, by Daniel Shatz, Assistant Appellate Defender, for defendant

- appellee.

PER CURIAM

.
Justice BEASLEY took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. The remaining members of the Court are equally divided, with three members voting to affirm and three members voting to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. Accordingly, the decision o f the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and st ands without precedential value

. See , e.g. , Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary , 365 N.C. 305, 716 S.E.2d 849 (2011) ; State v. Pastuer , 365 N.C. 287, 715 S.E.2d 850 (2011).S TATE V
. H USS Opinion of the Court

2 AFFIRMED.
##### 



(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 Dex Media West LLC as of the dates and for
the periods expressed in the Report.
 /s/ David C. Swanson
    
    /s/ Steven M. BlondyDavid C. Swanson
    
    Steven M. BlondyChairman of the Board of Directors and
    
    Executive Vice President andChief Executive Officer
    
    Chief Financial OfficerAugust 7, 2007
    
    August 7, 2007
  23
Exhibit-99.906 Exhibit



10-Q Exhibit 32.2: Certifications 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 iShares COMEX Gold Trust
(the Trust) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Francis Ryan, Chief Financial Officer of Barclays Global Investors, N.A.,
the Sponsor of the Trust, 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, 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 Trust.



|                                                                    
|--------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 23, 2005                                                  
|                                                                    
|/s/    FRANCIS RYAN                                                 
|Francis Ryan * Chief Financial Officer (Principal financial officer)



|* | The Registrant is a trust and Mr. Ryan is signing in his capacity as an officer of Barclays Global Investors, N.A., the Sponsor of the Registrant.
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13A-14(A) AND 15D-14(A),
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Timothy T. Yates, certify that:

(1)   I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Monster Worldwide, Inc.;

(2)   Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

(3)   Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4)   The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:



(5)   The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



|Date: February 21, 2008 |  | By: | /s/TIMOTHY T. YATESTimothy T. Yates
      Executive Vice President and
      Chief Financial Officer
|----------------------- |  | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
STATE v. Henry Lee JAMES.

No. 19P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 2, 2006.

Kathleen U. Baldwin, Assistant Attorney General, Frank R. Parrish, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th day of January 2006 by Defendant for "Writ of Discretionary Review":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of March 2006."
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Gregg A. Ostrander, as Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of
Michael Foods, Inc. (the Company) certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



(1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the U.S. 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, 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.



Dated: November 4, 2004



By:

/s/ Gregg A. OstranderGregg A. OstranderChairman, Chief Executive Officerand President
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>                         0001020017
<NAME>                        ALLSTAR SYSTEMS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,581 
<SECURITIES>                                         0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,540 
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (249)
<INVENTORY>                                      4,700 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,090 
<PP&E>                                           3,685 
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (1,672)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  33,184 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,266 
<BONDS>                                              0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0 
<PREFERRED>                                          0 
<COMMON>                                            45 
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,723 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    33,184 
<SALES>                                        129,167 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               129,167 
<CGS>                                          111,126 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  111,126 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,386 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 685 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,970 
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,126 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,844 
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0 
<CHANGES>                                            0 
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,844 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .52 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .52 
                                           

</TABLE>
STATE v. Terrence Rodricus ELLIOTT.

No. 184A04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 3, 2006.

M. Gordon Widenhouse, Jr., Chapel Hill, for Elliott.

William N. Farrell, Special Deputy Attorney General, Garland N. Yates, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd day of February 2006 by Attorney General for extension of time to file brief on 13 February 2006:

"Motion Allowed. Attorney General shall have up to and including the 13th day of February 2006 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 3rd day of February 2006."
Exhibit 10.2

                                 August 1, 2005

The Board of Directors
Assure Data, Inc.
6680 Yosemite
Dallas, Texas 75254


Gentlemen:

     Reference  the Form SB-2  Registration  Statement of Assure  Data,  Inc. As
disclosed in the "Use of Proceeds"  section,  this will evidence our  commitment
that,  in the event the proceeds of the offering are  insufficient  to cover the
estimated offering costs of approximately $50,000, the undersigned hereby commit
and  agree to  contribute  to the  Company  sufficient  funds to cover  all such
offering costs.

     In  addition,  the  undersigned  commit  and agree  that,  in the evenT the
Company  experiences a deficit in its cash flow during the 12 months ending July
31, 2006, they will advance the Company sufficient funds to continue operations.
Such loans shall be due out of first  available  cash flow and bear  interest at
the annual rate of 5%.



                                                      /s/ Robert Lisle
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Robert Lisle


                                                      /s/ Max Kipness
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Max Kipness
Sammy JOHNSON and Vici Johnson v. COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, Paul Clifton and Fred Raab.

No. 635P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2006.

John L. Sarratt, Ann M. Anderson, Raleigh, for Insurance Company.

Jeffrey E. Oleynik, Greensboro, Marvin K. Blount, Jr., Rebecca C. Blount, Harry H. Albritton, Jr., Greenville, for Sammy & Vici Johnson.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 14th day of November 2005 by Defendant (Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co.) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th day of January 2006."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Keebler
Foods Company Consolidated Balance Sheet at January 1, 2000 and the Consolidated
Statement of Operations for the year ended January 1, 2000 found on pages F-3
through F-5 of Keebler's Form 10-K and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001018848
<NAME>                        KEEBLER FOODS COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-4-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    JAN-1-2000
<CASH>                                              20,717
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       73,620
<ALLOWANCES>                                         8,568
<INVENTORY>                                        176,280
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   335,579
<PP&E>                                             756,721
<DEPRECIATION>                                     203,690
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,528,183
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              457,485
<BONDS>                                            419,160
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               846
<OTHER-SE>                                         408,469
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,528,183
<SALES>                                          2,667,771
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,667,771
<CGS>                                            1,150,553
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,444,383
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    25,834
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    22,474
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  36,174
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    161,380
<INCOME-TAX>                                        73,175
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 88,205
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        88,205
<EPS-BASIC>                                           1.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         1.01


</TABLE>