alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-60238 Summary Calendar

KENNETH GLENN ATKINSON

Petitioner - Appellant

v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Respondent - Appellee

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 5:01-CV-48-GR

- - - - - - - - - - October 10, 2002 Before KING, Chief Judge, and WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Kenneth Glenn Atkinson, federal prisoner #10776-042, appeals the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he asserted a sentencing error based on Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Atkinson has failed to address the district court’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on his petition. Atkinson has thereforeNo. 02-60238 -2- waived argument on this issue. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). This appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). It is therefore DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. APPEAL DISMISSED.
#### STATE v. LEWIS

No. 16 PC.

Case below: 28 N.C. App. 212.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 February 1976. Motion of Attorney General to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 3 February 1976.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 accompanying Form 10-Q of Kewaunee Scientific Corporation
(the "Company") for the period ending January 31, 2003, I, William A. Shumaker,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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) such Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended January 31, 2003,
         fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
         Securities Act of 1934; and

     (2) the information contained in such Form 10-Q of the Company for the
         period ended January 31, 2003, fairly presents, in all material
         respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
         Company.

Date:  March 14, 2003

                                               /s/ William A. Shumaker
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               William A. Shumaker
                                               President
                                               and Chief Executive Officer
Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 1 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 1 of 9

Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 2 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 2 of 9

Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 3 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 3 of 9

Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 4 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 4 of 9

Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 5 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 5 of 9

Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 6 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 6 of 9

Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 7 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 7 of 9

Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 8 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 8 of 9

Case 1:07-cv-03496-WHP Document 36-13 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 9 of 9 Case 05-21207 Document 3655 Filed in TXSB on 01/26/2007 Page 9 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-03385-BSJ-KNF Document 24-2 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03385-BSJ-KNF Document 24-2 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 2 of 2
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-102915,333-85840, 333-59342, 333-112013 and 333-122330) of Neoforma, Inc. of our report dated March 14, 2005 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

/s/    PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP 

 

San Jose, California 

March 14, 2005
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

DoD, Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee.

# ACTION:

Notice of revised non-foreign overseas per diem rates.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee is publishing Civilian Person Per Diem Bulletin Number 242. This bulletin lists revisions in the per diem rates prescribed for U.S. Government employees for official travel in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands and Possessions of the United States. AEA changes announced in Bulletin Number 194 remain in effect. Bulletin Number 242 is being published in the                         **Federal Register**                         to assure that travelers are paid per diem at the most current rates.                    

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         December 1, 2005.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This document gives notice of revisions in per diem rates prescribed by the Per Diem Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee for non-foreign areas outside the continental United States. It supersedes Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletin Number 241. Distribution of Civilian Personnel Per Diem Bulletins by mail was discontinued. Per Diem Bulletins published periodically in the                     **Federal Register**                     now constitute the only notification of revisions in per diem rates to agencies and establishments outside the Department of Defense. For more information or questions about per diem rates, please contact your local travel office. The text of the Bulletin follows:                

Dated: November 23. 2005.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DoD.

      ( print page 71811)          ( print page 71812)          ( print page 71813)          ( print page 71814)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[FR Doc. 05-23482 Filed 11-29-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001—06-C
Exhibit 4.1 Description of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended


 

EXHIBIT 4.1

DESCRIPTION OF THE REGISTRANT’S SECURITIES

REGISTERED PURUSANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE SECURITIES

EXCHNAGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED

 

As of December 31, 2019, Zhong Ya International Limited (“we,” “our,” “us” or the “Company”) had one class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”): its common stock with a par value of $0.001 per share (“Common Stock”). 

 

Pursuant to our articles of incorporation, our authorized capital stock consists of (i) fifty million (50,000,000) shares of Common Stock and (ii) ten million (10,000,000) shares of preferred stock, with a par value of $0.001 per share. The following description summarizes the material terms of our capital stock. For a complete description of the matters set forth herein, you should refer to our articles of incorporation, our bylaws, and the applicable provisions of Nevada law.

 

Defined terms used herein and not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

Common Stock

 

The holders of the Common Stock shall possess all voting power and each share of Common Stock shall have one vote on all matters submitted to the stockholders for a vote.

 

Capital Market

 

Our Common Stock is quoted on the OTC Pink Tier of the OTC Markets Group, Inc. under the symbol “ZYJT.” There has been no trading in our shares of Common Stock.
#### STATE v. RAY

No. 2 PC.

Case below: 39 N.C. App. 260.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 4 April 1979.
THOMAS F KBGNR 

AIM RUSSO ' 

STEPHEN H, TONER ' 

FERN FLOMENHAPT ' 

K'ijV1.N G. HORBATIUIC 

CWRE F. RIJSI-1 

CHRTSTOPHER CI. KEhNE 

DAVID 5. COULD 

OF COUNSEL; 

STJSAN KEANE 

FPW-JCESCA A. SABRATINO 

RUSSO, KEANE O TONER, LLE' 

ATTORNEY s ar I .AW 

26 BROADWAY 

NEW YORK, NEW YORI< 10004 

(21%) 48Z-[X)Q1 

f AY (7.1 2) 662.1)002 

VVV RKTL\V.COM JOHN J. KOM AR 

CHRTSTOPT-TER D. MEHNO 

THERESA VlLLhNl 

DENISE M. BUSH' 

BRENDA R HALL 

JOSEFTNA A. BBLhlONTE 

MIL'HML]. s~RNEY' 

CHARLENE c'. KOW " 

Mtb\Q ~::~~~~~h.E~~ST

R. RARRTNGTON PlNK 

MATTHEW P. MAZZOLA 

LEE-DAVID WEfNER 

TINA AT-TTNKL-PROFITA 

March 26,20Q8: !! -. . . . .L - , .: ...... ! 4 Y.- 212-805-4258 : . , ....-:... ! 7 .-...... : ' 

'.. ..... : ..: : ........... ..... , . . . . . : 1 

......... 

- ,. .-. : i ....... 

U.S. Magistrate Debra Freeman . -, .. 

. (T;.f-jF! 1 : :...... ; , i .: ... ..-: :. .. i . -. .*.:.. ' ............ ..... United States District Court ............. .... 

-.. -, .. .-., .- -. 

.----- .............. .-- ..I.- _. ..___ : 1 .. ... ..,.... .. .. ........- ru.: 

Southern District of New York 

500 Peal Street; Room 520 

New York, New York 10007- 13 12 

Re: DOMINIK DIFRISCO, et ano v, 

MARRIOTT 1NTERNATIONA:II ., TNC. 

USDC-SD Civil Action No. 0701)' 153 1, 

RK&T File No.: 640.039 

Dear Magistrate Freeman: 

I received by fax this aftmoon a copy of your Order dated, iegarding our telephone 

conference of March 3 1.2008. 

In that Order you direct that all remaining discovery issues are tc.1 )e completed by Friday, 

April 10, 2008. This Order presumably includes tlie deposition of the lefendant's Senior Vice 

President for Risk Management, Brad Wood, at the defendant's offices i.1 I Washington, D.C. 

The plaintiff respectfully requests that we be permitted to condl1 ? the deposition of Mr. 

Wood on or beforc May 1 5th, 2008. It will be necessary for my office 1, receive and review the 

defendant's accidentlincident claims logs to prepare for tlwt deposition. 1 thc event that we need 

Case 1:07-cv-03531-CM-DCF Document 13 Filed 04/04/2008 Page 1 of 2
RUSSO, KEANE 6 TONER MEMO ENDORSED 

additional information to discm andlor decode the entrics in the docun:~,: nts which the defmdant 

will produce, I want to make sure that we have an opportunity to get thal, information prior to Mr. 

Wood's deposition. 

I will be out of the country from April 23' through April 29". ' Iherefore, I rcspcctfblly 

request that the deposition of Brad Wood be scheduled at a mutually corn1 I nient time on, or before, 

May 15Ih, 2008. 

Thank you for your courtesy in this regard. 

Very truly yours, 

RUSSO, KEANE i!i~ TONER LLPA 

cc: Daniel M. Stewart, Esq. Via Fax Onlw- 212--1187-9777 

WHITE, FLEISHNER & FINO. LLP 

6 1 Broadway - 18th Floor 

New York, New York 10006 

dr~ewarl@wf-law. corn 

SO ORDERED: DATE: J~A 

DEBRA FREEMAN 

UNlTED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:07-cv-03531-CM-DCF Document 13 Filed 04/04/2008 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Cal R. Hoagland, SeniorVice President and Chief Financial Officer of Interwave CommunicationsInternational Ltd. (the “Company”) hereby certify that to the best of myknowledge:

 

(1)                                  The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K forthe period ended June 30, 2004, and to which this certification isattached as Exhibit 32.2 (the “Periodic Report”), fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2)                                  The information contained in the Periodic Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  October 12, 2004 | /s/ CAL R. HOAGLAND                               |
|------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|
|                         | Cal R. Hoagland                                   |
|                         | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 32.2
                                                                  ------------



                           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 quarterly report of K-V Pharmaceutical Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended December 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Ronald J. Kanterman, Vice President and Chief Financial 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 results of
              operations of the Company.






Date: June 27, 2008                         /s/ Ronald J. Kanterman
                                   --------------------------------------------
                                               Ronald J. Kanterman
                                    Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
                                          (Principal Financial Officer)
#### Ivy 49-96 Cooperative Joint Venture, Petitioner, v Susan C. Danberg, Respondent.

Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County,

January 16,1987

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Fischbein, Olivieri, Rosenholc & Badillo*for petitioner. *Gal-let & Dryer*for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Edward H. Lehner, J.

The issue raised on this motion to dismiss is whether a 120-to 150-day notice that a lease would not be renewed based on nonprimary residence is valid if sent by the cooperative corporation owning the building, rather than by the holder of the unsold shares allocable to the subject apartment. The court holds that such notice is invalid and therefore grants the motion.

*524This proceeding was instituted by the proprietary lessee who is the holder of the unsold shares. The petition asserts (para 8) that the 120- to 150-day notice was sent to respondent indicating "that the landlord elected to terminate the said tenancy and proceed to recover possession and that unless the said tenant removed from said premises * * * petitioner would commence summary proceeding * * * to remove said tenant.”

Although the foregoing asserts action taken by "petitioner”, the notice in fact was sent by the cooperative corporation subsequent to the conversion, at a time when petitioner herein was the holder of unsold shares allocable to the subject apartment.

Petitioner asserts that such procedure is proper because Code of Rent Stabilization Association of New York City, Inc. § 60 requires that notices of nonrenewal be sent by the "owner”, and the cooperative corporation is the owner of the building.

However, the term "owner” is defined in Rent Stabilization Code § 2 (h) to mean: "An owner, lessor, sublessor, sponsor of a condominium or cooperative, assignee, or other person receiving or entitled to receive rent for the use and occupancy of any dwelling unit, or an agent of any of the foregoing.”

Upon delivery of a proprietary lease to a holder of unsold shares, the cooperative enters into a landlord-tenant relationship with such holder, is no longer in privity with the rent-regulated occupant of the unit and may not commence proceedings to evict based on nonprimary residence. A decision as to whether to remove a tenant on such grounds or on any other statutory basis lies only with the proprietary lessee. Of course, an occupant is subject to eviction by the cooperative on a number of grounds, such as nuisance, illegal activity, etc. But in such instances, the proceeding is against the proprietary lessee, with the occupant being named as an undertenant.

Since the cooperative cannot commence summary proceedings against an alleged nonprimary resident, it cannot serve a notice stating that the occupant’s lease will not be renewed and that summary proceedings will be commenced based on said grounds. Thus, since the party seeking to evict did not serve a 120- to 150-day notice of intention not to renew, the proceeding must be dismissed. *(Crow v 83rd St. Assocs.,*68 NY2d 796.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                   JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                     SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                                36,655
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          3,918
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      40,573
<PP&E>                                                41,898
<DEPRECIATION>                                             0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        83,454
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 10,411
<BONDS>                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                              10,150
<OTHER-SE>                                            62,890
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          83,454
<SALES>                                               45,149
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      45,149
<CGS>                                                 18,036
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         18,036
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     161,307
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (134,194)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        (134,194)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (134,194)
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (134,194)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            (.001)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              0



</TABLE>
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 1933** 

ARTHUR W. MASSEY , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,

v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte

. Max O. Cogburn, Jr. , District Judge. ( 3:12

- cv - 00385

- MOC )

Submitted : November 21, 2013 Decided: November 25, 2013

Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Arthur W. Massey, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Dun Rappaport, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Boston, Massachusetts, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this ci rcuit.2 PER CURIAM: Arthur W. Massey appeals the district court order upholding the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision finding Massey ineligible for Social Security Income (SSI) payments as of September 2009 , because he acquired non

- home real prop erties
that increased his creditable resources above the limit for SSI eligibility

. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. * Massey v. Colvin , No.
3:12

- cv - 00385

- MOC (W.D.N.C. July 17, 2013)

. We deny Massey’s motion to reinstate SSI payments. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would
not aid the de cisional process.

AFFIRMED

* While Massey appears to assert on appeal that the agency improperly refused to approve a plan to achieve self

- support (“PASS”) that would allow him to exclude the challenged properties from his resources determination , Massey did not fairly raise this issue before the district court, where he argue d that he had received the properties as part of a PASS. See Muth v. United States , 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993) (declining to consider issues raised for first time on appeal absent exceptional circumstances). In any event, the record provides no indication that Massey ever submitted a PASS to the Social Securit y Administration or that he meet s the requirements to qualify for a PASS

. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1226 (2013) (requirements for PASS).
Case 1:07-cv-03427-NRB Document 1 Filed 04/30/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03427-NRB Document 1 Filed 04/30/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03427-NRB Document 1 Filed 04/30/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03427-NRB Document 1 Filed 04/30/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03427-NRB Document 1 Filed 04/30/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-03427-NRB Document 1 Filed 04/30/2007 Page 6 of 6