alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0411

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CATHIE WARREN

a/k/a CATHIE ODEGAARD,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including August 29, 2022, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 14 2022

07/14/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0411
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

# Wntteb**~tate~** 

# Q[ourtof**~peaI~** 

# fortbejfeberaIQ[trcutt
CARLOS A. DIAZ-LABOY, Plaintiff-Appellant, 

### v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. 2012-5072 Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in case no. 10-CV-751, Judge Lawrence J. Block. 

### ON MOTION

ORDER Carlos A. Diaz-Laboy moves to amend his name in the caption. Upon consideration thereof, IT Is ORDERED THAT: The motion to amend the official caption is granted. The revised official caption is reflected above. Case: 12-5072 Document: 37 Page: 1 Filed: 10/11/2012CARLOS DIAZ-LABOY v. US

s21 FOR THE COURT /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk 2 Case: 12-5072 Document: 37 Page: 2 Filed: 10/11/2012
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Glenn R. Richter, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Sears, Roebuck and Co.; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this annual report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this annual report; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)  Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures,or caused such disclosurecontrols and proceduresto be designed under oursupervision, to ensurethat material informationrelating to theregistrant, including itsconsolidatedsubsidiaries, is madeknown to us by otherswithin those entities,particularly during theperiod in which thisannual report is beingprepared;  (b)  Evaluated theeffectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosurecontrols and proceduresand presented in thisannual report ourconclusions about theeffectiveness of thedisclosure controls andprocedures, as of the endof the period covered bythis annual report basedon such evaluation; and  (c)  Disclosed in this annualreport any change in theregistrant’s internalcontrol over financialreporting that occurredduring the registrant’smost recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annualreport) that hasmaterially affected, oris reasonably likely tomaterially affect, theregistrant’s internalcontrol over financialreporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
 (a)  All significantdeficiencies and materialweaknesses in the designor operation of internalcontrol over financialreporting which arereasonably likely toadversely affect theregistrant’s ability torecord, process,summarize and reportfinancial information;and  (b)  Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involvesmanagement or otheremployees who have asignificant role in theregistrant’s internalcontrol over financialreporting.
Date: February 23, 2005
/s/Glenn R. Richter
#### MIDGETT v. MIDGETT

No. 15 PC.

Case below: 5 N.C. App. 74.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 23 September 1969.
#### Guillermina SILVA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES,* Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-72960.

Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 23, 2005.**

Decided April 4, 2005.

Michael S. Cabrera, Law Offices of Michael S. Cabrera, Huntington Park, CA, for Petitioner.

*151CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Thomas K. Ragland, Esq., Allen W. Hausman, Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 Alberto R. Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM ***

Guillermina Silva, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of her appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. *See Medina-Morales v. Ashcroft,*371 F.3d 520, 528 (9th Cir.2004) (“[T]he jurisdictional bar in § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) applies only to acts over which a statute gives the Attorney General pure discretion unguided by legal standards or statutory guidelines.”).

Reviewing the IJ’s denial of a continuance for abuse of discretion, *see Nakamoto v. Ashcroft,*363 F.3d 874, 883 n. 6 (9th Cir.2004), we deny that aspect of the petition for review. The IJ did not abuse, or fail to exercise, her discretion by denying the continuance. *See Avila-Murrieta v. INS,*762 F.2d 733, 736 (9th Cir.1985).

The BIA did not address Silva’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim, which was properly raised to the agency in her appellate brief. We therefore remand for further proceedings regarding this claim.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; REMANDED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit (99.4)

 Written Statement of the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
                          Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

       Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, the
undersigned Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
Interstate Power and Light Company (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on
my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
quarter ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/  Thomas M. Walker
---------------------
Thomas M. Walker
August 9, 2002
Exhibit 10.4 

THIRD AMENDMENT ANDWAIVER TO 

THIRD AMENDED ANDRESTATED REVOLVING CREDIT AGREEMENT 

        ThirdAmendment and Waiver, dated as of April 14, 2003, to Third Amended and Restated RevolvingCredit Agreement (“this Amendment”), by and among**IONICS, INCORPORATED**, aMassachusetts corporation (the “Borrower”), **FLEET NATIONAL BANK** and theother lending institutions listed on Schedule1 to the Credit Agreement (ashereinafter defined) (the “Banks”), amending certain provisions of the ThirdAmended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as of June 29, 2001 (as amended bythe First Amendment and Waiver, dated as of December 21, 2001, and the Second Amendmentand Waiver, dated as of March 28, 2002, and as further amended and in effect from time totime, the “Credit Agreement”) by and among the Borrower, the Banks and **FLEETNATIONAL BANK**as agent for the Banks (in such capacity, the “Agent”). Termsnot otherwise defined herein which are defined in the Credit Agreement shall have the samerespective meanings herein as therein. 

        **WHEREAS**,the Borrower and the Banks acknowledge that Revolving Credit Loan Maturity Date occurredon March 26, 2003; 

        **WHEREAS**,the Borrower has requested that the Revolving Credit Loans and all of the Loan Documentsbe reinstated as of April 14, 2003, and the Banks have agreed to reinstate the RevolvingCredit Loans and all of the Loan Documents as of such date, all of which shall be in fullforce and effect from and after such date; 

        **WHEREAS**,the Borrower and the Banks have agreed to modify and waive certain terms and conditions ofthe Credit Agreement as specifically set forth in this Amendment; 

        **NOW,THEREFORE**, in consideration of the premises and the mutual agreements contained hereinand for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which arehereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 

        **§**1.**  Amendments****to****Section****1****of****the****Credit****Agreement.  **Section 1.1 of the Credit Agreement is hereby amendedas follows: 

    (a)                 The definition of “ApplicableMargin” contained in          §1.1 of the Credit Agreement is hereby amended by deleting such definition          in its entirety and restating it as follows:
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer

I, Vincent Rossi, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief
Financial Officer of St. Bernard Software, Inc. (the Small Business Issuer), do hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:



| | (1) | the Small Business Issuers Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the Report), to which this statement is filed as an exhibit,
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1034 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 Small Business Issuer.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |                               
|------------------- |  | ------------------------------
|Dated: May 14, 2008
|                    | 
|By:                 |  | /s/ Vincent Rossi             
|                    |  | Vincent Rossi                 
|                    |  | Chief Executive Officer       
|                    |  | Acting Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7072

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TIMON JEROME MICHAUX, a/k/a Too Short,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. 

Voorhees, District Judge. (5:00-cr-00047-RLV-10)

Submitted: December 15, 2011 Decided: December 20, 2011

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timon Jerome Michaux, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Timon Jerome Michaux appeals the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion 

for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find 

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. United States v. Michaux, No. 

5:00-cr-00047-RLV-10 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 4, 2011). 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
# L_2007219EN.01000701.xml

| 24.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 219/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 219/7

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 989/2007

of 23 August 2007

registering certain names in the Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Barèges-Gavarnie (PDO) — Hořické trubičky (PGI))

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

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 the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

1

Whereas:

| (1) | In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) and pursuant to Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France’s application to register the name ‘Barèges-Gavarnie’ and the Czech Republic’s application to register the name ‘Hořické trubičky’ were published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) and pursuant to Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France’s application to register the name ‘Barèges-Gavarnie’ and the Czech Republic’s application to register the name ‘Hořické trubičky’ were published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2).

Official Journal of the European Union

2

| (2) | As no objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 was sent to the Commission, these names should be registered, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 was sent to the Commission, these names should be registered,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The names in the Annex to this Regulation are hereby registered.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

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

Done at Brussels, 23 August 2007.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12. Regulation amended by Regulation (EC) No 1791/2006 (OJ L 363, 20.12.2006, p. 1).

1

(2)  OJ C 279, 17.11.2006, p. 9 (Barèges-Gavarnie); OJ C 280, 18.11.2006, p. 10 (Hořické trubičky).

2

---

ANNEX

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

Class 1.3. —   Cheeses

FRANCE

Barèges-Gavarnie (PDO)

2.   Foodstuffs referred to in Annex I to the Regulation

Class 2.4. —   Bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, biscuits and other baker’s wares

CZECH REPUBLIC

Hořické trubičky (PGI)

---
J

- S63026

- 19

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. NON - PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Appellee

v. KAREEM OLIVER ,

Appellant : : : : : : : : : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 3646 EDA 2018 Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered November 20, 2018 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): CP

- 51

- CR

- 1003111

- 2004
BEFORE: GANTMAN , P. J. E. , MURRAY , J. and STRASSBURGER, J. *
DISSENTING M EMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 30, 2020 Because I would grant Appellant’s motion for an extension of time to respond to counsel’s Anders brief before reaching the merits of Appellant’s claims on appeal, I respectfully dissent. Briefly , after Appellant pro se file d the instant notice of appeal, the PCRA court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw. On appeal to this Court, Appellant pro se filed a brief. Because the PCRA court improperly permitted counsel to withdraw after a notice of appeal had been filed, this Cour t remanded for the PCRA court to appoint appellate counsel. The PCRA court complied. On September 30 , new counsel filed a motion to withdraw with this Court and an Anders brief. Appellant had until October 30 to respond to the Anders brief. Although Appell ant did not file a brief, on October 29, 2020, he filed a motion for an extension of 60 days to respond because heJ

- S63026

- 19

- 2

-

had been unable to access the prison law library due to the COVID

- 19 pandemic

. Appellant was left without counsel when he initially filed th is notice of appeal, and Appell ant is again left without counsel and unable to respond meaningfully to counsel’s Anders brief. Appellant is currently serving a sentence of 30 to 60 years of incarceration. Thus, Appellant is not going anywhere and the Commo nwealth would not be prejudiced by the granting of Appellant’s motion. Accordingly, I would grant Appellant’s motion for an extension of time to respond to counsel’s Anders brief, and defer addressing the merits of Appellant’s claims until after that time

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
                                      
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                            2796
<SECURITIES>                                    213625
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     181199
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                397620
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4571535
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           760091
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      10663
<COMMON>                                        886840
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4969155
<SALES>                                           1451
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  1451
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (1049544)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                9813
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (1146886)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (1146886)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5530 

To require the Secretary of the Interior to ensure that the flags of the 

several States, the District of Columbia, and the territories of the United 

States encircle the Washington Monument. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 15, 2010 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of the Interior to ensure that the 

flags of the several States, the District of Columbia, 

and the territories of the United States encircle the 

Washington Monument. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PLACEMENT OF FLAGS AT WASHINGTON MONU4 MENT. 

5 The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Di6 rector of the National Park Service, shall ensure that the 

7 flags of the several States, the District of Columbia, Amer8 ican Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5530 IH

1 Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto 

2 Rico, encircle the Washington Monument in the District 

3 of Columbia. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
# C_2007250EN.01000101.xml

| 25.10.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 250/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 250/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4834 — ALSTOM/Ecotècnia)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 250/01)

On 19 September 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4834. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4834. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 May 13, 2005 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q by Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical
Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the Company), for the quarter ending March 31, 2005 (the
Report), as filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the
undersigned, Jack A. Hockema, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to
such officers knowledge:  (1)
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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 dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the date first above
written. /s/ Jack A. HockemaJack A. HockemaChief Executive Officer
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Kaiser
Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and will be retained by Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.