alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

JOHNNY W. STELL,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:10cv55/LAC/EMT

SGT. ANDERSON, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated June 17, 2010 (Doc. 16). The parties have been furnished a copy of the

Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to

Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). No objections have been filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, I have determined that the Report and

Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by

reference in this order.

2. That this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with

an order of the court.

DONE AND ORDERED this 21 day of July, 2010. st

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 13 OF TITLE 18OF THE UNITED STATES CODE (18U.S.C.1350)ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002In connection with the Annual Report of CanAlaska Uranium Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20F for the year ended April 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ram Ramachandran, the 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 to my knowledge:(1)           the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) 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 the operations of the Company. Date:           August 17, 2011. “Ram Ramachandran”                                           Chief Financial Officer
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 10-K (the “Report”) of Oilsands Quest Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended April 30, 2011, the undersigned Annie Lamoureux, Vice President and Controllerof the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge and belief:
  (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.
   July 5, 2011/s/ Annie LamoureuxAnnie Lamoureux, Vice President and Controller
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

LEONARD MARSHALL,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 4:10-cv-172-SPM/WCS

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Magistrate

Judge’s Report and Recommendation (doc. 22), which recommends that the

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (doc. 5) be granted. Plaintiff has been afforded

an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section

636(b)(1). Plaintiff has filed an objection (doc. 23). Pursuant to Title 28, United

States Code, Section 636(b)(1), I have conducted a de novo review of the

sections of the report to which objections have been made. I find that the Report

and Recommendation is correct and should be adopted.

Plaintiff objects that his claim is not time-barred because he was not

aware that court records in Leon County incorrectly represented that he had a

conviction until six years after his termination. However, as Defendant’s allegedly
wrongful termination of the Plaintiff, the basis of the lawsuit, occurred in 2002,

the limitations period began to run from the time of his termination, at which time

his alleged injury should have become apparent.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (doc. 22) is

adopted and incorporated by reference into this order.

2. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (doc. 5) is granted.

3. Plaintiff’s complaint (doc. 1) is dismissed as barred by the statute

of limitations and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted.

4. All pending motions are denied as moot.

DONE AND ORDERED this fourth day of March, 2011.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF PANAMA

CITY BEACH, INC.,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv10/RS-MD

BECO, INC.,

Defendant.

_________________________________/

ORDER

Before me are Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss Or Stay Pending Arbitration

(Doc. 4-3) and the Report Of The Parties’ Planning Meeting (Doc. 14). 

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Activity in this case is stayed until October 22, 2010. The parties shall 

file monthly status reports of the progress of the arbitration proceeding 

with the court not later than the 15 day of each month. th

2. Failure to complete arbitration not later than October 22, 2010, without

good cause may result in a waiver of the right to arbitrate. Waiver may

occur if a party acts inconsistently with the right o arbitration, such as

undue delay, and in some way prejudices the other party. See Ivax Corp.

v. B. Braun of America, Inc., 286 F.3d 1309, 1315-16 (11 Cir. 2002); th

S&H Contractors, Inc. v. Taft Coal Col, Inc., 906 F.2d 1507, 1514 (11 Cir. th

1990).

Case 5:10-cv-00010-RS-MD Document 15 Filed 03/02/10 Page 1 of 2
ORDERED on March 2, 2010.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:10-cv-00010-RS-MD Document 15 Filed 03/02/10 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

PENSACOLA MOTOR SALES INC., a

Florida Corporation d/b/a BOB TYLER

TOYOTA 

VS CASE NO. 3:09cv571-RS/MD

EASTERN SHORE TOYOTA LLC, an

Alabama Limited Liability Company;

DAPHNE AUTOMOTIVE LLC, an

Alabama Limited Liability Company;

SHAWN ESFAHANI, an Individual; and

DAPHNE ENTERPRISES INC., an

Alabama Corporation

JUDGMENT

This action came before the Court and a jury with the Honorable Richard Smoak

presiding. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment is entered in favor of the

Defendants, Eastern Shore Toyota LLC, Daphne Automotive LLC, Shawn Esfahani, and

Daphne Enterprises, Inc., and against the Plaintiff, Pensacola Motor Sales, Inc.

 October 1, 2010

SHEILA HURST-RAYBORN

ACTING CLERK OF COURT

 s/ Kristin Cowdell

DATE Deputy Clerk: Kristin Cowdell

Case 3:09-cv-00571-RS-MD Document 174 Filed 10/01/10 Page 1 of 1
Moody 10-Q





EXHIBIT 31.2




Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to


Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




I, Robert W. Engel, certify that:





1.
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Moody National REIT I, Inc.;





2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4.
The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:




a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;




b) Intentionally omitted;




c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and




d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and





5.
The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and




b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.









Date: August 16, 2010





/s/ Robert W. EngelRobert W. EngelChief Financial Officer and Treasurer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Anthony Hicks, certifythat:

 

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Otter Tail Ag Enterprises, LLC;

 

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

 

4. I am responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant andhave:

 

(a) Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to myself by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.  I have disclosed, based on my most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of governors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date:  February 20,2009

 
|   | /s/ Anthony Hicks                                    |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Anthony Hicks                                        |
|   | Chief Executive Officer  and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

BILLIE JO BUCKLAND, LARRY M BUCKLAND,

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00033-MP -AK

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 27, Response to Order to Show Cause by John

Piccin, Esq. Mr. Piccin had been directed to show cause why it was appropriate under Rule 11

to attach his signature to an Amended Complaint alleging only Federal Tort Claims Act

(“FTCA”) jurisdiction in its jurisdiction-invoking paragraph, then bringing a breach of contract

cause of action. Mr. Piccin has timely filed his response to the order to show cause, in which he

explains his actions. 

Mr. Piccin argues that it was an oversight to incorporate his assertion of jurisdiction

under the FTCA into his breach of contract claim, rather than alleging supplemental jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, but not so grave an error as to merit sanctions under Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 11(b)(3). This Court agrees. Mr. Piccin had a good-faith basis to assert subject

matter jurisdiction under the tort claims in the Amended Complaint through the FTCA, though

the law was ultimately not in his favor in that respect. Had his attempt to assert subject matter

jurisdiction succeeded, this Court would have had supplemental jurisdiction over the breach of

contract claim. 
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:10-cv-00033-MP -AK

Mr. Piccin has adequately explained that his errors in drafting the Amended Complaint

were not the product of contempt or bad faith. The Rule for him to Show Cause is

DISCHARGED. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 28th day of September, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

C. & J. CLARK INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,

Appellant,

v.

UNITY CLOTHING INC.,

Appellee.

______________________ 

2013-1542

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in Cancellation 

No. 92049418.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

STEPHEN P. MCNAMARA, St. Onge Steward Johnston & 

Reens, LLC, of Stamford, Connecticut, argued for appellant. With him on the brief was ANDY I. COREA. 

VONN R. CHRISTENSON, Call & Jensen, of Newport 

Beach, California, argued for appellee. 

______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is
 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (O’MALLEY, MAYER, and WALLACH, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

 April 9, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole

Date Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Clerk of Court
John A. Beranbaum, Esq.

BERANBAUM, MENKEN, BEN-ASHER & BIERMAN, LLP
80 Pine Street, 32nd Floor

New York, New York 10005

Telephone: (212) 509-1616

Facsimile: (212) 509-8080

Counsel for Plaintiff Sherrie Russell-Brown

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

SHERRIE RUSSELL-BROWN, Civil Action No. 09-02479 (SRC)(MAS)

Plaintiff, (PROPOSED) ORDER DENYING

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
“ TO DISMISS AND FOR

THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD CHANGE IN VENUE
OF TRUSTEES, THE UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA, LEVIN COLLEGE OF LAW, and
ROBERT H. JERRY, II, in his individual and
official capacities as Dean of the University of
Florida, Levin College of Law,

Defendants.

THIS MATTER having come before the Court upon the motion of Defendants the
University of Florida Board of Trustees, the University of Florida, Levin College of Law, and Robert
H. Jerry, II (collectively “Defendants”), and the Court having considered the motion papers and for

good cause shown,

IT IS on this day of , 2009 hereby
ORDERED that:
1. Venue is proper in this District, and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or Transfer

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404 and 1406 is DENIED;



2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Complaint or, Alternatively, for Summary Judgment

and for Other Relief is DENIED;

The Honorable Stanley R. Chesler
United States District Judge
Exhibit 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-110309) and on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-109481,
333-106074, 333-97913) of Eagle Broadband, Inc. of our report dated December 13,
2002 relating to the financial statements, which appear in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.



/S/McManus & Co., P.C.
----------------------
McManus & Co., P.C.
Rockaway, New Jersey
December 8, 2003
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice 133298 & (46) Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. WAR-AG FARMS, LLC, Stephen J. Markman, DALE WARNER and DEE ANN WARNER, Justices Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v SC: 133298 COA: 270242 Lenawee CC: 05-001940-AA FRANKLIN TOWNSHIP, FRANKLIN TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, and FRANKLIN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for l eave to file a brief amicus curiae is GRANTED. The application for leave to appe al the January 17, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals fo r consideration as on leave granted.

p1119 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2007

Clerk
#### BEATRICE A. REED v. COLLINS DEPARTMENT STORE, INC.

(Filed 29 September, 1965.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Hubbard, J.,*March 1965 Session of ONSLOW.

Action to recover for personal injuries.

Plaintiff alleges in substance these facts: In the afternoon of 17 June 1963 she entered defendant’s department store for the purpose of purchasing lamps. As she was walking along the center customer aisle of the store she stepped on a glob of wax, about the “size of a nickel,” slipped, fell to the floor, and suffered injuries to her person. About 45 minutes before, an employee of defendant had waxed the floor. He had negligently failed to properly spread this spot of wax, and defendant negligently permitted it to remain on the floor without giving warning of its presence.

Plaintiff introduced evidence tending to support most of the allegations of the complaint. Two issues, relating to defendant’s negligence and damages, were submitted to the jury. The jury answered the negligence issue “no.” Judgment in favor of defendant was entered.

*Ellis, Hopper, Warlick & Waters for plaintiff.*

*E. W. Summersill and Strickland Warlick for defendant.*

PER Curiam.

Plaintiff brings forward and discusses in her brief eight assignments of error. All relate to the judge’s charge. Plaintiff stresses her exception to the failure of the judge to instruct the jury with respect to defendant’s duty “to give an invitee notice of any hidden danger or unsafe conditions.” *Revis v. Orr,*234 N.C. 158, 66 S.E. 2d 652. This principle of law does not arise upon the evidencé. The only evidence in the record which even remotely refers to any warning or failure to warn is the statement of a witness that “at the time Mrs. Reed fell, there were no signs in the store concerning work *392being done on the floor.” There is no evidence that any work was then being done on the floor; the evidence is to the contrary. Furthermore, the exception is not valid for other reasons. We have carefully considered all assignments of error and we find in them no merit.

No error.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2031 

To amend the FAST Act to allow States to include information on small 

business concerns owned and controlled by veterans in reporting under 

the disadvantaged business enterprises program of the Department of 

Transportation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 27, 2019 

Mr. BARRASSO introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the FAST Act to allow States to include information on small business concerns owned and controlled 

by veterans in reporting under the disadvantaged business enterprises program of the Department of Transportation, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans Enhancing 

5 Transportation Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 2031 IS

1 SEC. 2. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES. 

2 Section 1101(b)(6) of the FAST Act (23 U.S.C. 101 

3 note; Public Law 114–94) is amended— 

4 (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period 

5 at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; 

6 (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and 

7 (B) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively, and indent8 ing appropriately; 

9 (3) in the matter preceding clause (i) (as so re10 designated), by striking ‘‘The Secretary shall estab11 lish’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘The Secretary 

12 shall— 

13 ‘‘(A) establish’’; and 

14 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

15 ‘‘(B) allow State governments to include in 

16 reporting described in subparagraph (A) infor17 mation concerning small business concerns that 

18 are owned and controlled by veterans (as de19 fined in section 101 of title 38, United States 

20 Code) that are not socially and economically 

21 disadvantaged individuals.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 26 (Thursday, February 8, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 5983]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-562]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Amended 
Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel, 
January 5, 2007, 2 p.m. to January 5, 2007, 4 p.m. National Institutes 
of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, 5th Floor Conference Room, 
Rockville, MD 20852 which was published in the Federal Register on 
December 28, 2006, 71 FR 78215.
    The meeting will be held on March 9, 2007. The meeting is closed to 
the public.

    Dated: February 1, 2007.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-562 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### GRIFFITH v. GRIFFITH

No. 90 PC.

Case below: 38 N.C. App. 25.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 28 November 1978.