alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

VICKI WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 4:09-cv-340/RS/WCS

SUPREME COURT,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Magistrate Judge’s Order and Amended Report and Recommendation 

(Doc. 5). Plaintiff has not filed objections.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Order and Amended Report and Recommendation is 

approved and incorporated in this Order.

2. This case is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 

granted because it is frivolous.

3. The clerk is directed to close the file.

ORDERED on November 12, 2009.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
#### STATE v. SAWYER

No. 10 PC.

Case below: 42 N.C. App. 731.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 November 1979.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JONATHAN WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00080-MP-AK

ALACHUA COUNTY, et al,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court upon the filing of an Amended Motion for Leave to

Proceed in Forma Pauperis. (Doc. 5). Plaintiff has again submitted insufficient information for

the Court to assess his request for leave to proceed IFP. Plaintiff must submit certified Inmate

Account Information signed by an officer at the jail with detailed account information showing

deposits as well as charges. A ruling on the pending motion for IFP will be deferred until the

Prisoner Consent Form and account information is submitted.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

That Plaintiff shall submit the Prisoner Consent Form and inmate account information on

or before June 30, 2010, or his motion will be denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of June, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 20, 2016

No. 04-16-00724-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF R.S.-T., A CHILD,

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-2048-CV

Honorable W.C. Kirkendall, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

In this accelerated appeal of the October 13, 2016 order terminating Appellant’s parental 

rights, Appellant’s brief was due to be filed with this court on December 19, 2016. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 38.6(a). Before the brief was due, Appellant filed a motion for a thirty-day extension of 

time to file Appellant’s brief. 

Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s brief must be filed with this court by 

January 18, 2017. See id. Further motions for extension of time to file Appellant’s brief are 

discouraged. See TEX. R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2, (directing courts of appeals to dispose of SAPCR 

suits “[w]ithin 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed”). 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 20th day of December, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated August 28, 2014, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-197354) of Smart Trust, Diversified
Income and Growth Trust, Series 5.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


Grant
Thorninton LLP


Chicago, Illinois


August 28, 2014
# C_2010094EN.01001202.xml

| 14.4.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/12

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5795 — Siemens/Sinara Locomotives/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 94/08

On 6 April 2010, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

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

—

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

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5795. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5795. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Exhibit 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  Registration  Statements
indicated below of Brookdale  Living  Communities,  Inc. of our report indicated
below filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


Registration Statements
-----------------------
Form S-8 No. 333-51493
Form S-3 No. 333-53969
Form S-3 No. 333-65843


         Financial Statements                     Date of Auditor's Report
         --------------------                     ------------------------

Consolidated   Financial  Statements  of                 March 4, 1999
Brookdale Living Communities, Inc. as of
December  31,  1998 and 1997 and for the
year ended December 31, 1998 and for the
period from May 7, 1997 through December
31, 1997 and the combined  statements of
operations, changes in partners' capital
(deficit) and cash flows of  Predecessor
Properties  for the period from  January
1, 1997  through May 6, 1997 and for the
year ended December 31, 1996 included in
the  Annual   Report   (Form   10-K)  of
Brookdale Living  Communities,  Inc. for
the year ended  December  31, 1998 dated
March 31, 1999.


                                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Chicago, Illinois
March 30, 1999
# C_2009302EN.01001901.xml

| 12.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 302/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 302/19

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

11 December 2009

2009/C 302/08

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4757 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 131,13 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4420 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,90515 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4490 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5125 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,4435 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,727 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 273,12 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7068 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1457 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2568 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,2058 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6076 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5481 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,4373 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,0274 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0495 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 718,14 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,0255 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,0755 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2810 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 936,05 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,0166 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 68,082 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 44,3730 |
| THB | Thai baht | 48,868 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,5846 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,0144 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 68,7100 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4757

JPY

Japanese yen

131,13

DKK

Danish krone

7,4420

GBP

Pound sterling

0,90515

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4490

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5125

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,4435

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,727

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

273,12

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7068

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1457

RON

Romanian leu

4,2568

TRY

Turkish lira

2,2058

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6076

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5481

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,4373

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,0274

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0495

KRW

South Korean won

1 718,14

ZAR

South African rand

11,0255

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,0755

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2810

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 936,05

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,0166

PHP

Philippine peso

68,082

RUB

Russian rouble

44,3730

THB

Thai baht

48,868

BRL

Brazilian real

2,5846

MXN

Mexican peso

19,0144

INR

Indian rupee

68,7100

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
EXHIBIT 23.1







CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (no. 333-168461) and the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (nos. 333-145079 and 333-135366) of Oilsands Quest Inc., of our report dated July 29, 2009 on the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, comprehensive loss and cash flows for the period from inception on April 3, 1998 through to April 30, 2007 (not separately presented herein) of Oilsands Quest Inc., appearing in amendment no. 2 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A of Oilsands Quest Inc. for the year ended April 30, 2010.
 
 
 /s/ Smythe Ratcliffe LLP
 
 
 Chartered Accountants
 Vancouver, Canada
 May 16, 2011
    EX-1
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

EUGENE C. WILLIAMS and ) LYNNE M. WILLIAMS, ) ) Appellants, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-1964 ) IBERIABANK; PRISCILLA A. SEARCY ) A/K/A PRICILLA A. SEARCY; and ) BRIGHTWATER COVE HOMEOWNERS ) ASSOCIATION, INC., ) ) Appellees. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed May 1, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Walt Logan, Senior Judge. Mark P. Stopa of Stopa Law Firm, LLC, Tampa (withdrew after briefing); Latasha Scott of Lord Scott, PLLC, Tampa (withdrew after briefing); Richard J. Mockler of Stay In My Home, P.A., St. Petersburg (withdrew after briefing); Christopher Hixson of Athena Law, PLLC, Largo (substituted as counsel of record), for Appellants. Melissa A. Campbell of Jones Walker, LLP, Miami, for Appellee IberiaBank No appearance for remaining Appellees.- 2 -

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, VILLANTI, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

KEVIN LAMAR DAVIS,

Petitioner, 

vs. Case No. 3:09cv336/LAC/CJK

KENNETH S. TUCKER,

Respondent

________________________________________________________________

O R D E R

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

Recommendation dated March 14, 2012. (Doc. 30). 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. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1), challenging the

conviction and sentence in State of Florida v. Kevin Lamar Davisin the Circuit Court

for Escambia County, Florida, Case No. 07-CF-2024 is DENIED, and the clerk is

directed to close the file.

Case 3:09-cv-00336-LC-CJK Document 33 Filed 06/11/12 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 11 day of June, 2012.

th

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No: 3:09cv336LAC/CJK

Case 3:09-cv-00336-LC-CJK Document 33 Filed 06/11/12 Page 2 of 2
CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND


CHIEF
FINANCIAL 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 quarterly Report of Jumpkicks, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended April, 30, 2009 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “Report”), I,  Richard Douglas, 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) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and





2.
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the
      dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company
      for the periods presented.





By:
            /s/Richard DouglasName:
            Richard
      DouglasTitle:
            Principal
      Executive Officer,Principal
      Financial Officer and DirectorDate:
            June
      15, 2009





This
certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Jumpkicks, Inc. and will be retained by Jumpkicks, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

STEVEN HOWALD, on his own 

behalf and others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 3:10cv174/MCR/MD

BAY SAND COMPANY, INC.,

a Florida Profit Corporation,

Defendant.

 /

O R D E R

This matter is referred to the undersigned on the document entitled “Defendant’s

Answer” submitted for filing and signed by Eva M. Abrahamsen, as President of Bay Sand

Company, Inc. “The rule is well established that a corporation is an artificial entity that can

act only through agents, cannot appear pro se, and must be represented by counsel.” 

Palazzo v. Gulf Oil Corp., 764 F.2d 1381, 1385 (11th Cir. 1985). Accordingly, defendant

shall be allowed thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this order to retain proper

representation in this action. Should counsel fail to appear on behalf of defendant within

the allotted time, the court will assume defendant has no intention of defending this action

and default will be entered accordingly. 

It is, therefore, ORDERED:

1. The document entitled “Defendant’s Answer” and signed by Eva M.

Abrahamsen, as President of Bay Sand Company, Inc., shall be returned by the clerk

without filing. The clerk is directed to include a copy of this order with the returned

document to Bay Sand Company, Inc., by regular U.S. mail to 1344 North Beal Extension,

Fort Walton Beach, Florida 32547.
Page 2 of 2

2. Defendant shall be allowed thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this order

to retain proper representation in this action. Counsel must file a written notice of

appearance within the prescribed time period. Failure to do so will result in entry of a

default.

DONE and ORDERED this 6th day of July, 2010.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No.: 3:10cv174/MCR/MD
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

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

 

I, Anthony Hicks, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof Otter Tail Ag Enterprises, LLC;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

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

 

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to myself byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

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

 

5.  I havedisclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of governors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare 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, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date:  May 15, 2009

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

 

----
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 40592 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
RAFAEL SANTOS GALAN

- CASTRO , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:13

- CR

- 1014

- 1

Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rafael Santos Galan

- Castro has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Galan

- Castro h a s not file d a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal

* 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 1 6 , 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-40592 Document: 00513079627 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2015No. 14

- 40592

2 presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 14-40592 Document: 00513079627 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2015
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 26, 2014

No. 04-14-00098-CR

Eric Lashan MACK,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR10162

Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

ORDER

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that “this criminal case is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea bargain, 

and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and 

agreed to by the defendant; therefore, the trial court’s certification accurately reflects that the 

criminal case is a plea-bargain case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules 

of Appellate Procedure provides, “The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the 

defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules.” TEX. R. APP.

P. 25.2(d). It is therefore ORDERED that this appeal will be dismissed pursuant to rule 25.2(d) of 

the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure unless appellant causes an amended trial court certification 

to be filed by March 27, 2014, showing appellant has the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

25.2(d); 37.1; see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State,110 

S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). All other appellate deadlines are 

SUSPENDED pending our resolution of the certification issue.

_________________________________

Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court 

on this 26th day of February, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

KIMBERLY JOHNSON.,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 4:10cv247-SPM/WCS

GT TECHNOLOGIES I, INC., d/b/a

PRECISION ENGINE PRODUCTS CORP.,

d/b/a GT TECHNOLIGIES,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This case has been dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the parties’

stipulation of dismissal (doc. 11) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Accordingly, the clerk shall close this case.

SO ORDERED this 24th day of September, 2010.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge