alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
F OR P UBLICATION



### UNIT E D ST AT E S CO URT O F APPE AL S FO R T H E NINT H CIRCUIT

O R A C L E U SA, I

N C ., a Colorado corporation; O R

A C L E A M E R

I C A , I N C

. , a Delaware corporation; O R A C L E I N T E R N A T I O N A L C O R P O R A T I O N , a California corporation,

Plaintiffs-Appellees ,

v
. R I M I N I S T R E E T , I N C ., a Nevada corporation; S E T H RA V I N , an individual, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 16-16832 16-16905
D.C. No. 2:10-cv-00106- L RH-VCF

ORDER

On Remand from the United States Supreme Court

F iled April 16, 2019

B e fore: Susan P. Graber, J acqueline H. Ng uy en, and Michelle T. F riedland, Circuit J udg es.

OrderO R A C L E U SA V

. R I M I

N I S T R E E T 2
SUMMARY *

Copyright / Costs
P u rsuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Rimin i Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, I nc. , 1 39 S. Ct. 873 ( 2019 ) , the p a n el vacated the portion of the district court’s judg men t awarding non-tax able costs in a copy r ig ht suit and remanded for further proceeding s.

ORDER
I n Oracle U

SA, Inc. v. Rimini Street, Inc. , 879 F .3d 948 (9th Ci r
. 2018), we affirmed in part, reversed in part, a nd vacated in part the district c ourt’s judg ment in fa v o r o f Plaintiffs Oracle USA, I nc. and related entities on c laims alleg ing , among other thing s, copy rig ht violations b y Defendants Rimini Street, I nc. and Seth Ravin. Pertinent here, we held that the district court properly awarded Oracle approx imately $12.8 million in non-tax able costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505. Oracle , 8 79 F .3d at 965–66. W e rejected,
as foreclosed by binding c i rc u it precedent, Defendants’ argument that the district c ourt was limited, when assessing costs, to the ty

pes of costs specifi e d in the g eneral costs statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1920. Oracle , 879 F .3d at 965–66. W e therefore affirmed the portion of the district court’s judg ment awarding non-tax able costs. Id.

* T h is su m m ary co n stitu

tes n o p art o f th e o pin io n o f th e co urt. It h as b eenp rep ared b y

co urt staf

f f o r th e co n v en i en ce o f

th e read er.O R A C L E U SA V

. R I M I

N I S T R E E T 3
The Supreme Court g ranted certiorari, Rimini Street, Inc.
v. Oracle USA, Inc. , 1 3 9 S. Ct. 52 (2018) (mem), and h eld that our circuit precedent was erroneous, 139 S

. C t

. 873 (2019). The Court held that the Copy rig ht Act a

uthoriz e s district courts to award o n l y t hose “costs specified in the g eneral costs statute, [ 2 8 U.S.C.] § § 1 821 and 1920.” Id. at 881. The Court remanded the case for further p roce e ding s. Id. Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision, we vacate the portion of the d i strict court’s judg ment awarding Oracle $12.8 million in non-tax able costs, and we remand the case to the district court for further proceeding s consistent with this order and the Supreme Court’s opinion.
VA C A T E D in part and REMANDED. The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.
#### CONSTRUCTION CO. v. MANAGEMENT CO.

No. 53 PC.

Case below: 37 N.C. App. 549.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 November 1978. Motion of defendant to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 3 November 1978.
#### STATE v. PENNELL

No. 123 PC.

Case below: 54 N.C. App. 252.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 12 January 1982. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 12 January 1982.
IC 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2052 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 2, 2019 

Referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

AN ACT 

To authorize the honorary promotion of Colonel Charles E. 

McGee to brigadier general in the United States Air Force. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

S 2052 RFH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR HONORARY PROMOTION OF 

2 COLONEL CHARLES E. MCGEE TO BRIGADIER 

3 GENERAL IN THE UNITED STATES AIR 

4 FORCE. 

5 The President is authorized to issue an appropriate 

6 honorary commission promoting to brigadier general in 

7 the Air Force Colonel Charles E. McGee, United States 

8 Air Force (retired), a distinguished Tuskegee Airman 

9 whose honorary promotion to that grade has the rec10 ommendation of the Secretary of the Air Force in accord11 ance with the provisions of section 1563 of title 10, United 

12 States Code. 

13 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON BENEFITS. 

14 No person is entitled to any bonus, gratuity, pay, or 

15 allowance by reason of section 1. 

Passed the Senate July 31, 2019. 

Attest: JULIE E. ADAMS, 

Secretary. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Exhibit 31.4

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

﻿

﻿

I, Richard Crowley, certify that:

﻿

|  | 1.I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 10-K/A of Intersil Corporation for the year ended December 30, 2016; |
|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

﻿

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

﻿

Dated: February 23, 2017

﻿

| ﻿ | /s/ Richard Crowley                                                           |
|----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| ﻿ | Richard Crowley

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |

﻿

----
II 

Calendar No. 168 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1992 

To amend the FAST Act to repeal a rescission of funds. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 26, 2019 

Mr. BARRASSO (for himself, Mr. CARPER, Mrs. CAPITO, and Mr. CARDIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

JULY 31, 2019 

Reported by Mr. BARRASSO, without amendment 

A BILL 

To amend the FAST Act to repeal a rescission of funds. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF RESCISSION. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1438 of the FAST Act 

5 (Public Law 114–94; 129 Stat. 1432) is repealed. 

6 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents 

7 in section 1(b) of the FAST Act (Public Law 114–94; 129 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 1992 RS

1 Stat. 1312) is amended by striking the item relating to 

2 section 1438. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Calendar No. 168 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1992 

A BILL 

To amend the FAST Act to repeal a rescission of 

funds. 

JULY 31, 2019 

Reported without amendment 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-18      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-03583-LBS-RLE     Document 28-18      Filed 05/30/2008     Page 2 of 2
FLN (Rev. 4/2004) Deficiency Order Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

ALLISON BONANNO

vs

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE

Case No. 5:10cv25-SPM/MD

ORDER

Plaintiff’s MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (received 2/18/2010), was

referred to the undersigned with the following deficiencies:

Signature Blocks. The typed or printed name, The Florida Bar or other state bar number

of the attorney, address (including the nine-digit zip code), telephone, facsimile number

of the attorney (or Pro Se party) filing the document, and a notation of which party the

attorney represents (counsel for plaintiff or defendant) shall be included in the signature

block. An original signature must be affixed to any document which is filed in paper

form. The electronic signature, which is the equivalent of an original written signature, is

described above. - See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a); N.D.Fla. Loc. R. 5.1(B)(5).

Electronic Case Filing Required; Administrative Order. All documents in civil and

criminal cases shall be filed by electronic means, except that documents in cases filed pro

se (prisoner and non-prisoner), and documents in other categories of cases (or types of

documents) identified by Administrative Order, shall continue to be filed in paper form. 

A judicial officer may grant other exceptions for good cause. - See NDFla Loc R

5.1(A)(1),(2)

For these reasons, IT IS ORDERED that:

The submitted hard copy of the document shall be returned to you by the Clerk without

electronic filing. It may be resubmitted after the above noted deficiencies are corrected.

Other:

DONE and ORDERED this 19 day of February, 2010. th

/s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Exhibit
32.1




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 Royal Quantum Group, Inc. a Nevada
corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Ron Ruskowsky, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies
to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Royal Quantum Group, Inc., and will be retained by Royal Quantum Group, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.




/s/
      Ron RuskowskyRon
      Ruskowsky
                Chief
      Executive and Financial Officer
                  March
      31, 2008
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            DISTINCTIVE DEVICES, INC.

                       CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                          OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                          -----------------------------


     The undersigned, Sanjay Mody, the President, Chief Executive Officer,
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of Distinctive Devices, Inc. (the
"Company"), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

     1.   The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended
June 30, 2004, (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     2.   Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be
executed this 23rd day of September, 2004.

                                         /s/ SANJAY MODY
                                         ---------------
                                         Sanjay Mody
                                         President,
                                         Chief Executive Officer,
                                         Treasurer and
                                         Chief Financial Officer
# C_2011159EN.01001901.xml

| 28.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 159/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 159/19

---

Communication from the Commission concerning the quantity not applied for to be added to the quantity fixed for the subperiod 1 October 2011 to 31 December 2011 under certain quotas opened by the Community for products in the poultrymeat sector

2011/C 159/08

Commission Regulation (EC) No 616/2007 (1) opened tariff quotas for imports of products in the poultrymeat sector. The applications for import licences lodged during the first seven days of April 2011 for the subperiod 1 July to 30 September 2011 are, as regards quotas 09.4212, 09.4214, 09.4217 and 09.4218, for quantities lower than those available. Pursuant to the second sentence of Article 7(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 (2), the quantities that were not applied for are to be added to the quantity fixed for the following quota subperiod, from 1 October to 31 December 2011; they are set out in the Annex to this notice.

1

2

---

(1)  OJ L 142, 5.6.2007, p. 3.

1

(2)  OJ L 238, 1.9.2006, p. 13.

2

---

ANNEX

| Quota order number | Quantities not applied for, to be added to the quantity fixed for the subperiod 1 October 2011 to 31 December 2011
  (in kg) |
| --- | --- |
| 09.4212 | 27 783 000 |
| 09.4214 | 2 986 100 |
| 09.4217 | 8 313 000 |
| 09.4218 | 3 478 800 |

Quota order number

Quantities not applied for, to be added to the quantity fixed for the subperiod 1 October 2011 to 31 December 2011

(in kg)

09.4212

27 783 000

09.4214

2 986 100

09.4217

8 313 000

09.4218

3 478 800

---
Exhibit 32.1





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 Royal Quantum Group, Inc. a Nevada corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Ron Ruskowsky, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Royal Quantum Group, Inc., and will be retained by Royal Quantum Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.








/s/ Ron RuskowskyRon Ruskowsky

Chief Executive and Financial Officer

April 13, 2011
Case 1:06-cv-15134-AKH Document 5 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cv-03579-LTS-MHD Document 19 Filed 10/02/2007 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03579-LTS-MHD Document 19 Filed 10/02/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03497-LAK     Document 7      Filed 10/10/2007     Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
             PURSUANT TO TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lancaster Colony Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John L. Boylan, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of
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.

Date:  November 12, 2002                 By: /s/JOHN L. BOYLAN
                                             -----------------
                                               John L. Boylan
                                               Vice President and Chief
                                               Financial Officer


                                       15
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 4040

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. ADRIAN MORRISON , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro

. Catherine C. Eagles , District Judge. ( 1:17

- cr
- 00204

- CCE

- 1 )

Submitted : October 15, 2019 Decided: December 10, 2019

Before RICHARDSON and RUSHING , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Sophia L. Harvey, LIAO HARVEY PC, Winston

- Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant. Stephen Thomas Inman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Gree nsboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Adrian Morrison pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to Hobbs Act

r obbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) (2012), and b randishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2012). The district court sentenced Morrison to a total of 216 months’ imprisonment, and Morrison now appeals. Morrison’s counsel filed a brief pursua nt to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioning whether Morrison’s § 924(c) conviction is valid. We affirm. ∗ Morrison questions whether, after the Supreme Court’s decision in Unite d States v.
Davis , 139 S. Ct. 2319 , 2336 (2019) ( invalidating the residual clause in § 924(c)(3)(B) ) , his § 924(c) conviction is valid. Because we have held that Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence under the force clause in § 924(c)(3)(A), Morrison’s § 924(c) conviction is
valid. See United States v. Mathis , 932 F.3d 242, 266 (4th Cir. 2019).
In accordance with Anders , we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have
found no meritorious grounds for appeal. We therefore affirm the district c ourt’s judgment

. This court requires that counsel inform Morrison , in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Morrison requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may

∗ Morrison’s plea agreement contained a provision waiving his right to appeal. However, because the Government has not sought to enforce the waiver, our review pursuant to Anders is not precluded. United States v. Poindexter , 492 F.3d 263, 271 (4th Cir. 2 007).3 move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Morrison

. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would n ot aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 1 of 9Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 2 of 9Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 3 of 9Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 4 of 9Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 5 of 9Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 6 of 9Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 7 of 9Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 8 of 9Case 1:07-cv-03480-AKH Document 11 Filed 01/07/2008 Page 9 of 9
Exhibit 32.1

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 Abazias, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Oscar Rodriguez, acting in the
capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my
knowledge, 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.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date:  April 11, 2005 |  | BY: /S/ Oscar Rodriguez
Oscar Rodriguez CEO and CFO
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------
#### STATE v. SHORES

No. 90 PC.

Case below: 28 N.C. App. 323.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 May 1976.
Case 7:07-cv-03544-KMK-LMS Document 3 Filed 05/03/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 7:07-cv-03544-KMK-LMS Document 3 Filed 05/03/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 7:07-cv-03544-KMK-LMS Document 3 Filed 05/03/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 7:07-cv-03544-KMK-LMS Document 3 Filed 05/03/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 7:07-cv-03544-KMK-LMS Document 3 Filed 05/03/2007 Page 5 of 5