alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 40577 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

– Appellee ,

v.
DAVID TORRES

- MENDEZ, also known as David Leonel Torres

- Mendez , Defendant

–

Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:19

- CR

- 282

- 1

Before JONES, HIGGINSON, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent David Torres

Mendez seeks leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Torres

- Mendez h a s not filed a r esponse. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set f orth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 14, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-40577 Document: 00515310511 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/14/2020No. 19

- 40577

2 issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdra w is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 19-40577 Document: 00515310511 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/14/2020
DENY; and Opinion Filed July 24, 2018.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-18-00832-CV

IN RE SOUTHWEST LABORATORIES, LLC; INTUIT DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY 

MANAGEMENT, LLC; B.M. MEDICAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE, LLC; 

STRATEGIC ANCILLARY SERVICES, LLC; AND MUNEAR ASHTON KOUZBARI, 

Relators

Original Proceeding from the 162nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-12748

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Fillmore, and Stoddart

Opinion by Justice Fillmore

In this original proceeding, relators complain of two discovery orders: a January 5, 2018 

order granting a motion to show cause and a February 5, 2018 order on a forensic examination 

protocol. A writ of mandamus issues to correct a clear abuse of discretion when no adequate 

remedy by appeal exists. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839–40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. 

proceeding). Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, not issued as a matter of right, but at the 

discretion of the court. Rivercenter Assocs. v. Rivera, 858 S.W.2d 366, 367 (Tex. 1993) (orig. 

proceeding). Although mandamus is not an equitable remedy, its issuance is largely controlled by 

equitable principles. Id. One such principle is that “equity aids the diligent and not those who 

slumber on their rights.” Id. Thus, delaying the filing of a petition for mandamus relief may waive 

the right to mandamus unless the relator can justify the delay. In re Int’l Profit Assocs., Inc., 274 
–2–

S.W.3d 672, 676 (Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding). A delay of only a few months can constitute 

laches and result in denial of mandamus relief. See Rivera, 858 S.W.2d at 366 (four months); In 

re Pendragon Transp. LLC, 423 S.W.3d 537, 540 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2014, orig. proceeding) (six 

month delay and filed less than two weeks before trial); Int’l Awards, Inc. v. Medina, 900 S.W.2d 

934, 936 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1995, orig. proceeding) (delay of four months and until eve of 

trial); Furr’s Supermarkets, Inc. v. Mulanax, 897 S.W.2d 442, 443 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1995, no 

writ) (four months); Bailey v. Baker, 696 S.W.2d 255, 256 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1985, 

orig. proceeding) (four-month delay, no explanation for delay, and filed two weeks prior to trial).

Here, relators waited more than five months to seek mandamus relief and offer no 

explanation for the delay. We conclude that relators’ unexplained delay bars their right to 

complain of the discovery orders through a petition for writ of mandamus. In addition, based on 

the record before us, we conclude relators have not shown an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, 

we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a) (the court must deny 

the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief sought).

180832F.P05

/Robert M. Fillmore/

ROBERT M. FILLMORE

JUSTICE
#### James DiMauro, Respondent, v Worcester Insurance Company, Appellant.

[720 NYS2d 353]

In an action to recover the proceeds of an insurance policy for the theft of an automobile, the defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), entered October 1, 1999, which granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, and (2) a judgment of the same court, entered November 22, 1999, which is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $58,550.50.

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action *(see, Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are *501brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

The plaintiff established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in the amount of $58,550.50, thereby shifting the burden to the defendant to submit admissible evidence establishing a triable issue of fact (see, *Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851, 853). In opposition to the plaintiffs motion, the defendant failed to come forward with evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to its defense of fraud. Moreover, the documents submitted by the defendant confirmed the accuracy of the plaintiffs valuation of the vehicle at the time of loss. Therefore, summary judgment was properly granted to the plaintiff *(see, Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., supra).*Bracken, Acting P. J., Altman, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.2





CERTIFICATION





I, Jon W. Clark, certify that:





| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-Q/A of Gramercy Property Trust Inc. (the “registrant”);
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Date: August 9, 2013

| | /s/ JON W. CLARK              
| | ------------------------------
| | Name: Jon W. Clark            
| | Title: Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to


18 U.S.C. Section 1350





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ares Capital Corporation (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2019 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), R. Kipp deVeer, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Penni F. Roll, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his or her 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.


Date: April 30, 2019/s/ R. KIPP DEVEERR. Kipp deVeerChief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)Date: April 30, 2019/s/ PENNI F. ROLLPenni F. RollChief Financial Officer (principal financial officer)





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 Ares Capital Corporation and will be retained by Ares Capital Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
## THE STATE OF TEXAS MANDATE

TO THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF LAMAR COUN TY, GREETINGS: Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 31st day of December, A.D. 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

In the Matter of S.A. No. 06

- 14

- 00055

- CV

Trial Court No. 10

- CJV

- 14

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court
below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. We note that the appellant, S.A., has adequately indicated h er inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs. WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed. WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appeals, with the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 20th day of March , A.D. 2015

.

DEBRA K. AUTREY , Clerk
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-4 No. 333-83117) and the Registration Statement (Form S-4 No. 333-43005) of
Park-Ohio Industries, Inc. for the registration of its 9.25% Senior Subordinated
Notes due 2007 of our report dated February 22, 2000 with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Park-Ohio Industries, Inc. included in this
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1999.


                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Cleveland, Ohio
March 27, 2000
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.11

                   SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     This Second Amendment to Employment Agreement (the "Amendment"), dated as
of the 27/th/ day of September, 2001 by and between COMFORCE Corporation
("COMFORCE") a Delaware corporation, and COMFORCE Operating, Inc. ("COI"), a
Delaware corporation that is wholly-owned by COMFORCE (COMFORCE and COI are
collectively referred to as the "Employer"), and Harry V. Maccarrone, a resident
of the State of New York ("Employee").

     WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of
January 1, 1999, pursuant to which Employer formalized the terms upon which
Employee is employed by Employer, which Employment Agreement was previously
amended as of January 23, 2001 (as amended, the "Employment Agreement"); and

     WHEREAS, the parties desire to further amend the Employment Agreement as
herein provided.

     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual obligations of
the parties contained herein, and for other valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as
follows:

     1.  Section 2 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended by changing
the Initial Termination Date therein from December 31, 2003 to December 31,
2005.

     2.  All other provisions of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement on the
day and year first above mentioned.

                                   COMFORCE CORPORATION

                                   By:_______________________________
                                      Its:

                                   COMFORCE OPERATING, INC.

                                   By:_______________________________
                                      Its:

                                   EMPLOYEE

                                   __________________________________
                                   Harry V. Maccarrone
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO SECTION 302  OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of General Nutrition Centers, 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(s) 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)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, 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
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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):
 (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrant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 have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
 August 7, 2008/s/ J. Kenneth Fox
J. Kenneth Fox
Interim Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gabriel Ramos, Appellant.

[718 NYS2d 845]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Solomon, J.), rendered October 13, 1998, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of *332criminal trespass in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 1 year, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant’s detailed written confession to the crime was demonstrably voluntary and reliable. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Lowell R. Selvin, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PlanetOut Inc.;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
          (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;
          (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
          (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):
          (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
          (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   Date:November 22, 2004 /s/ Lowell R Selvin  Lowell R Selvin Chief Executive Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-50452

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ROBERT T. DAVIS; LINDA M. DAVIS

Defendants - Appellants

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USCA No. 1:08-CV-238

Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Appellants’ liability and the court order to vacate and for the sale of the

land have been final long ago. No effort was made to abort the sale when

publication of the fourth notice was one hour late. The sale has been confirmed.

It has now been consummated and the present appeal is moot.

AFFIRMED.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

January 28, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 10-50452 Document: 00511364435 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/28/2011
#### In re Appeal of Decision of DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 01-PDB-198.

No. 2002-OB-2831.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 29, 2003.

In re Huey, Vernon;—Plaintiff; Applying for Appeal of Decision of Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 01-PDB-198.

Leave to appeal denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.2



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-36036, 333-69833, 333-69835, 333-69839,
333-69837, 333-72835, and 333-96385), Form S-3 (No. 333-65909) and on Form S-4
(333-61541) of Pennzoil-Quaker State Company of our report dated January 24,
2001 relating to the consolidated financial statements of Excel Paralubes, which
appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K as Exhibit 99.1.




PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas
March 15, 2001
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Trim Holding Group (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Nitin Amersey, 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: (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 as of the date and for the periods expressed in the Report. /s/ Nitin Amersey Nitin Amersey Chief Financial Officer May 10, 2010 The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-2510

IRIS MCCLAIN,

Debtor - Appellant,

v.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, f/k/a The Bank of New York, f/k/a JP 

Morgan Chase Bank, successor in interest to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.; as

Trustee, for GSMPS Mortgage Loan Trust 20032, Mortgage PassThrough 

Certificates, Series 20032 And Its Assignees And/Or Successors In Interest and 

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,

Creditors - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. 

Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:17-cv-03397-TDC)

Submitted: April 4, 2019 Decided: April 8, 2019

Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Iris McClain, Appellant Pro Se. Sarah E. Meyer, WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US) 

LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Iris McClain appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her bankruptcy appeal 

for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002, and denying her motion to 

alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). McClain v. The Bank of 

N.Y. Mellon, No, 8:17-cv-03397-TDC (D. Md. Apr. 30, 2018; Dec. 11, 2018). We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed 

in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in 

the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED