alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MORGAN STANLEY DEAN WITTER
CREDIT CORPORATION

January 7, 2000

As of and for the year ended  December  31,  1999,  Morgan  Stanley  Dean Witter
Credit  Corporation  (the "Company") has complied in all material  respects with
the minimum servicing standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of
America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers. As of and for
this same period, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., the Company's parent, had in
effect a fidelity  bond in excess of $25  million  and an errors  and  omissions
policy in excess of $25 million under which the Company was covered.

Nancy S. Donovan
President

Leroy Hodo
Vice President and Controller

2500 Lake Cook Road. 3 West. Riverwoods. Illinois 60015
#### STATE v. BOYD and PILKINGTON

No. 137 PC.

Case below: 36 N.C. App. 155.

Petition by defendant Pilkington for writ of certiorari to the North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 4 October 1978.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-8014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

NICHOLAS JAMES QUEEN, SR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District 

Judge. (1:93-cr-00366-WMN-1)

Submitted: April 8, 2016 Decided: April 13, 2016

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nicholas James Queen, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Paul Michael 

Cunningham, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, 

Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Nicholas James Queen, Sr., seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Queen has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### STATE v. HIGGENS

No. 87 PC.

Case below: 16 N.C. App. 434.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 December 1972.
#### STATE v. BUSH

No. 24.

Case below: 10 N.C. App. 185.

Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 1 February 1971.
Case 1:07-cv-03407-GBD Document 10-2 Filed 04/03/2008 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03407-GBD Document 10-2 Filed 04/03/2008 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03407-GBD Document 10-2 Filed 04/03/2008 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03407-GBD Document 10-2 Filed 04/03/2008 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03407-GBD Document 10-2 Filed 04/03/2008 Page 5 of 5
<PAGE>   1
11. Statement re computation of per share earnings

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   Second Quarter Ended                Six Months Ended
                                                         March 31,                          March 31,
                                                    2001             2000             2001             2000
                                             --------------   --------------   --------------   --------------

<S>                                          <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>
Net income in thousands                      $        5,112   $        4,826   $       12,013   $        8,336

Weighted average shares outstanding
                                                 15,812,575       14,345,858       15,700,595       14,292,086
Assumed exercise of stock options,
weighted average of incremental shares
                                                    707,713        1,418,544          790,396        1,337,976
Assumed purchase of stock under stock
purchase plan, weighted average
                                                     79,196           66,814           88,590           47,388
                                             --------------   --------------   --------------   --------------
Diluted shares - adjusted weighted-average
shares and assumed conversions                   16,599,484       15,831,216       16,579,581       15,677,450
                                             ==============   ==============   ==============   ==============

Basic earning per share                      $          .32   $          .33   $          .77   $          .58
                                             ==============   ==============   ==============   ==============

Diluted earnings per share                   $          .31   $          .30   $          .72   $          .53
                                             ==============   ==============   ==============   ==============
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 230 (Thursday, December 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 72125]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23575]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[USITC SE-05-043]


Sunshine Act Meeting

Agency Holding the Meeting: United States International Trade 
Commission.

Time and Date: December 5, 2005 at 2 p.m.

Place: Room 101, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: 
(202) 205-2000.

Status: Open to the public.

Matters to be Considered:
    1. Agenda for future meetings: None.
    2. Minutes.
    3. Ratification List.
    4. Inv. No. 731-TA-1090 (Final) (Superalloy Degassed Chromium from 
Japan)--briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to 
transmit its determination and Commissioners' opinions to the Secretary 
of Commerce on or before December 15, 2005.)
    5. Outstanding action jackets: None.
    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 28, 2005.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-23575 Filed 11-29-05; 2:43 pm]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

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


In connection with the Annual Report of Decorize, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report), I, Jon Baker, President
and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

       (2)    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.



/s/ Jon Baker
-------------------
Jon Baker
President and Chief Executive Officer
September 30, 2002
#### FREIGHT CARRIERS v. ALLEN CO.

No. 104 PC.

Cases below: 22 N.C. App. 442.

25 N.C. App. 315.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 6 June 1975.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1759 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1759

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 456 North Meridian Street in Indianapolis, Indiana, as the ``Richard 
                    G. Lugar Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. RICHARD G. LUGAR POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 456 North Meridian Street in Indianapolis, Indiana, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Richard G. Lugar Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Richard G. 
Lugar Post Office Building''.

            Passed the Senate July 30, 2019.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
116th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1759

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 456 North Meridian Street in Indianapolis, Indiana, as the ``Richard 
                    G. Lugar Post Office Building''.
```
|   | EXHIBIT      32 |
|--------|-----------------|

|   | (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/      David V. Singer                   |   | /s/      Rick D. Puckett                       |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------|
| David      V. Singer                       |   | Rick      D. Puckett                           |
| President      and Chief Executive Officer |   | Executive      Vice President, Chief Financial |
| May      5, 2010                           |   | Officer,      Treasurer and Secretary          |
|                                       |   | May      5, 2010                               |
<PAGE>
                                                                       EXHIBIT 8


                       TABLE OF REGISTRANT'S SUBSIDIARIES

Currently, Chartered has five subsidiaries, the particulars of which are as
follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Name of subsidiary                                      Country of              Date of         Proportion of ownership
                                                       incorporation         incorporation             interest

<S>                                                  <C>                      <C>               <C>
Chartered Silicon Partners Pte Ltd.                      Singapore             March 1997                51%
Chartered Semiconductor Manufacturing Inc.                 U.S.                June 1991                 100%
Chartered Semiconductor Japan Kabushiki Kaisha            Japan               October 2000               100%
Chartered Semiconductor Taiwan Ltd.                       Taiwan               August 2000               100%
Chartered Semiconductor Europe Ltd.                  England and Wales         March 2001                100%
</TABLE>
Norman C. Kleinberg 

Theodore V. H. Mayer 

William J. Beausoleil 

HUGHES HUBBARD & REED LLP 

One Battery Park Plaza 

New York, NY 10004-1482 

(212) 837-6000 

Paul F Strain 

David J. Heubeck 

VENABLE LLP 

750 E. Pratt Street 

Suite 900 

Baltimore, MD 21202 

(410) 244-7400 

Attorneys for Defendant Merck & Co., Inc.

-----------------------------------------------------x 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

-----------------------------------------------------x 

IN RE: 

Fosamax Products Liability Litigation 1:06-md-01789 (JFK) 

-----------------------------------------------------x 

This Document Relates to ALL CASES NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS

-----------------------------------------------------x 

TO: Attorney Admission Clerk and All Other Parties 

 Pursuant to Local Rule 1.3 of this Court, please take notice of the following attorney 

information change for Venable LLP. The mailing address for the Venable attorneys listed 

below should be changed to: 750 E. Pratt Street, Suite 900, Baltimore, MD 21202. All phone 

numbers, fax numbers and e-mail addresses for these attorneys remain the same. 

Paul F. Strain 

David J. Heubeck 

Christina L. Gaarder 

James E. Gray 

Case 1:07-cv-03465-JFK Document 33 Filed 06/02/2008 Page 1 of 3
Kathleen Sullivan Hardway 

M. King Hill, III 

Michael B. MacWilliams 

Stephen E. Marshall 

Randolph S. Sergent 

Craig A. Thompson 

All are Pro Hac Vice attorneys. 

Dated: June 2, 2008 

 New York, New York Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/ 

Paul F. Strain 

VENABLE LLP 

750 E. Pratt Street 

Suite 900 

Baltimore, MD 21202 

(410) 244-7400 

Fax: (410) 244-7742 

pfstrain@venable.com 

2 

Case 1:07-cv-03465-JFK Document 33 Filed 06/02/2008 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that on June 2, 2008, the foregoing NOTICE OF CHANGE OF 

ADDRESS was filed electronically and served electronically, pursuant to the Court's Case 

Management Order via the Court's CM/ECF system. 

 /s/ 

Paul F. Strain 

VENABLE LLP 

750 E. Pratt Street 

Suite 900 

Baltimore, MD 21202 

(410) 244-7400 

Fax: (410) 244-7742 

pfstrain@venable.com 

3 

Case 1:07-cv-03465-JFK Document 33 Filed 06/02/2008 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 1 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 2 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 3 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 4 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 5 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 6 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 7 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 8 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 9 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 10 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 11 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 12 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 13 of 14
Case 1:07-cv-03397-JGK Document 29 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 14 of 14
EXHIBIT 16.1

Deloitte & Touche LLP

P.O. Box 49279

Four Bentall Centre

2800  1055 Dunsmuir Street

Vancouver, British Columbia







V7X 1P4



Tel: 604-669-4466

Fax: 604-685-0395

www.deloitte.ca











March 8, 2004







Securities and Exchange Commission

Mail Stop 11-3

450 5th Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20549



Dear Sirs/Madams:



We have read Item 4 of Global Precision Medical Inc.s Form 8-K dated March 8, 2004,

and have the following comments:



1.

We agree with the statements made in the last sentence of paragraph 1 and the

statements made in the 2nd, 4th and 5th paragraphs.



2.

We have no basis on which to agree or disagree with the statements made in the

first two sentences of paragraph 1 or in the 3rd paragraph.



Yours truly,







/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP



Chartered Accountants
#### LOWDER v. MILLS, INC.

No. 164 PC.

No. 67 (Fall Term).

Case below: 45 N.C. App. 348.

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 15 July 1980.
Doc 

United States District Court

Southern District of New York

Office of the Clerk

U.S. Courthouse

500 Pearl Street, New York, N.Y. 10007-1213

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -X

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT

07cv3459

Sizelove v. Merck

 

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X 

 

Pursuant to the memorandum of the Case Processing Assistant, the above-entitled action is 

reassigned to the calendar of

Judge Keenan

All future documents submitted in this action are to be presented in the Clerk=s

Office of the Southern District Court for filing and shall bear the assigned judge=s

initials after the case number.

The attorney(s) for the plaintiff(s) are requested to serve a copy of the Notice of

assignment on all defendants.

J. Michael McMahon, CLERK

Dated: 5/09/2007

By: Jenny R. Horne

 Deputy Clerk 

 

 

cc: Attorneys of Record 

PS REASSIGNMENT FORM 

 

Data Quality Control 

Revised: March 9, 2001

Case 1:07-cv-03459-JFK Document 2 Filed 05/09/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### SCHULZ v. SCHULZ

No. 47 PC.

Case below: 31 N.C. App. 750.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 March 1977.
Case 7:07-cv-03458-SCR-GAY Document 3 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 7:07-cv-03458-SCR-GAY Document 3 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit
13.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Bontan Corporation Inc.. for
the year ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, I 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 annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Bontan
Corporation Inc.








Date:
 June 30, 2008








/s/ Kam
Shah





Kam
Shah


Chief
Executive Officer  and Chief 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 the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
Case 1:07-cv-03429-DCF Document 17 Filed 06/20/2008 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE v. GRAY

No. 147 PC.

Case below: 17 N.C. App. 131.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 6 February 1973.
#### COMR. OF INSURANCE v. AUTOMOBILE RATE OFFICE

No. 144 PC.

Case below: 23 N.C. App. 475.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Caroling Court of Appeals denied 7 January 1975.
NUMBER 13-18-00448-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JOANN RIVERA, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 148th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Valdez

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to possession of a controlled substance. On 

June 14, 2016 the trial court deferred adjudication of her guilt and placed her on 

community supervision. The appellant did not file a notice of appeal at that time, but 
2

instead brought this appeal of the trial court’s subsequent order of July 3, 2018 imposing 

sanctions and increasing community supervision for a year. We dismiss the appeal.

The right to appeal is conferred by the legislature, and a party may appeal only 

that which the legislature has authorized. Marin v. State, 851 S.W.2d 275, 278 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1993). A defendant has a right to appeal when his community supervision is 

revoked and he is adjudicated guilty and sentenced. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 

42.12, § 23(b). To the contrary, there is no statutory basis for an appeal of an order 

modifying a term or condition of probation. See Christopher v. State, 7 S.W.3d 224, 225 

(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. ref’d). Case law has long held that an order 

modifying or refusing to modify probation is not subject to appeal. See Basaldua v. 

State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977); Perez v. State, 938 S.W.2d 761, 762-63 

(Tex. App.—Austin 1997, pet. ref’d); Eaden v. State 901 S.W.2d 535, 536 (Tex. App.—El 

Paso 1995, no pet.). 

In this case, the record does not contain any order revoking Rivera’s community 

supervision, adjudicating her guilt, or assessing a jail or prison sentence. Accordingly,

the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that the order from which the 

appeal was taken was not an appealable order and requested correction of this defect 

within ten days or the appeal would be dismissed. On August 31, 2018, counsel filed a 

letter brief with this Court concluding this Court lacks jurisdiction.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, is of the 

opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the 

appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P.

42.3(a). 
3

/s/ Rogelio Valdez

ROGELIO VALDEZ

Chief Justice

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

27th day of September, 2018.
ROBERT CARTER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-2694

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 14, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County.

Michael C. Overstreet, Judge.

Robert Carter, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, C.J., BENTON and RAY, JJ., CONCUR.
##### 



| |  |             
| |  | ------------
| |  | EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation
  by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 No. 333-82168 and
  333-82166), pertaining to the 1997 Stock Plan, the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase
  Plan and the 2001 Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan of Symyx Technologies, Inc.,
  of our report dated January 25, 2002 included in this Annual Report on
  Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.

| |  |                      
| |  | ---------------------
| |  | /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Palo Alto, California

March 15, 2002