alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**I, D. Michael Kramer, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report of Ohio Legacy Corp; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which 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 inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recentfiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, thesmall business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the smallbusiness issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: March 30, 2006     By: /s/ D. Michael Kramer         D. Michael Kramer    President, Chief Executive Officer and acting Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   AUG-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        AUG-31-1999
<CASH>                                  187,965
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                           286,269
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                           2,355,861
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      3,072,646
<PP&E>                                  922,204
<DEPRECIATION>                        (333,474)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       10,320,282
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 1,414,343
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<COMMON>                                 13,480
<OTHER-SE>                            6,395,539
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         10,320,282
<SALES>                               2,217,275
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      3,016,373
<CGS>                                 1,336,502
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         1,336,502
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      1,318,981
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       10,081
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         259,131
<INCOME-TAX>                             90,860
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     168,271
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                            168,271
<EPS-BASIC>                             0.010
<EPS-DILUTED>                             0.010


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTH PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           6,318
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,849
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    109,573
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               142,516
<PP&E>                                          79,747
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 362,957
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          296,063
<BONDS>                                          5,078
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                   (277,355)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 (277,354)
<SALES>                                        538,541
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               538,541
<CGS>                                          301,240
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  301,240
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,369
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (87,447)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (87,447)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (87,447)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (87,447)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE v. ENSLIN

No. 40 PC.

Case below: 42 N.C. App. 565.

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

SYLVIA ARDLEY,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00185-MP -GRJ

MICHAEL J ASTRUE,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 23, Motion for Final Judgment by Michael J

Astrue. On January 10, 2010, the Court remanded this case pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for

further proceedings. On remand, Plaintiff was found eligible for benefits in a favorable

Administrative Law Judge decision dated November 16, 2010. Plaintiff has no objection to this

Motion for Final Judgment. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Motion for Final Judgment, Doc. 23, is GRANTED. 

2. The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment in favor of the Plaintiff.

3. Plaintiff is instructed that she must file her application for attorney fees under the

Equal Access to Justice Act within thirty (30) days of the entry of final judgment

for that application to be timely.

DONE AND ORDERED this 10th day of January, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
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 Health and Human Services

# ACTION:

Announcement of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the 20th meeting of the American Health Information Community Population Health and Clinical Care Connections Workgroup [formerly Biosurveillance Workgroup] in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.)

# DATES:

November 30, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. [Eastern Time]. 

# ADDRESSES:

Mary C. Switzer Building (330 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20201), Conference Room 4090 (please bring photo ID for entry to a Federal building).

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

*http://www.hhs.gov/​healthit/​ahic/​population/​.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Workgroup will continue its discussion on how to facilitate the flow of reliable health information among population health and clinical care systems necessary to protect and improve the public's health.

                    The meeting will be available via Web cast. For additional information, go to:                     *http://www.hhs.gov/​healthit/​ahic/​population/​pop_​instruct.html.*

Dated: October 3, 2007.

Judith Sparrow,

Director, American Health Information Community, Office of Programs and Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.

[FR Doc. 07-5047 Filed 10-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4150-24-M
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

EDWARD L. THOMPSON, SR.,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:09cv385/LAC/EMT

SUSAN M. NOVOTNY,

ROGER VINSON, and

M. CASEY RODGERS,

Defendants.

_________________________________/

O R D E R

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

Recommendation dated October 30, 2009 (Doc. 10). Plaintiff has been furnished a copy

of the Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections

pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo

determination of the timely filed objections (Doc. 12).

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the objections thereto

timely filed, 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 complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice as barred by res judicata.

3. All pending motions are DENIED as moot. 

4. This action is DISMISSED and the clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 16 day of December, 2009. th

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
# C_2009247EN.01000701.xml

| 15.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 247/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 247/7

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

14 October 2009

2009/C 247/03

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4881 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 133,39 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4437 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,93025 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,3029 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5166 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,2840 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,870 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 267,31 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7090 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2017 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2973 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,1546 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6326 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5311 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,5329 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,0212 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0725 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 729,77 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,8125 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,1585 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2550 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 941,08 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,0156 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 69,120 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,8216 |
| THB | Thai baht | 49,710 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,5514 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,4495 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 68,6240 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4881

JPY

Japanese yen

133,39

DKK

Danish krone

7,4437

GBP

Pound sterling

0,93025

SEK

Swedish krona

10,3029

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5166

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,2840

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,870

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

267,31

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7090

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2017

RON

Romanian leu

4,2973

TRY

Turkish lira

2,1546

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6326

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5311

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,5329

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,0212

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0725

KRW

South Korean won

1 729,77

ZAR

South African rand

10,8125

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,1585

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2550

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 941,08

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,0156

PHP

Philippine peso

69,120

RUB

Russian rouble

43,8216

THB

Thai baht

49,710

BRL

Brazilian real

2,5514

MXN

Mexican peso

19,4495

INR

Indian rupee

68,6240

---

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

1

Source

---
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

TOBIAS L ROLLE, 

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 4:10-cv-00152-MP-CAS

EDWIN G BUSS, et al., 

Respondents.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendation dated November 8, 2012. (Doc. 27). 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). Petitioner filed an objection at Doc.

29, and two motions to expand the record, Docs. 28 and 30. The motions at Doc. 28 and 30 are

granted, and the Court has considered the exhibits referred to in those motions. I have made a de

novo determination of petitioner's objection and have determined that the Report and

Recommendation should be adopted. 

The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that relying upon the advice of an individual

that petitioner knew to be a disbarred former lawyer, even after suspecting that he had

miscalculated the deadline, does not justify equitable tolling in this case. Further, the Court

agrees that petitioner has not presented new reliable evidence that was not presented at trial, and

which makes it more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have found petitioner guilty

beyond a reasonable doubt in light of the new evidence. Thus, petitioner's case does not trigger
Page 2 of 2

the "actual innocence" exception to the time limits for filing his federal habeas petition. Finally,

in light of the above rulings, the motion to stay the federal case to allow exhaustion of state

remedies is moot.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, Doc. 27, is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order. 

2. The motion to dismiss at Doc. 17 is GRANTED and the petition dismissed as

untimely. 

3. The motion to stay, Doc. 23, is DENIED.

4. The motions to expand the record, Docs. 28 and 30, are GRANTED.

5. The Clerk is directed to close this file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of March, 2013

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case No: 4:10-cv-00152-MP-CAS
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

WILLIAM T. HOLLIDAY,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:10cv264-WS

WARDEN TOMLINSON,

Defendant.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 4)

docketed June 30, 2010. The magistrate judge recommends that this case be

dismissed without prejudice because the plaintiff is not entitled to proceed without

payment of the filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The plaintiff has filed no

objections to the report and recommendation.

The court has reviewed the record and has determined that the magistrate

judge's report and recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation (doc. 4) is hereby

ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this order. 

2. The plaintiff's complaint and this case are DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 
Page 2 of 2

3. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13th day of September , 2010.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

 GAINESVILLE DIVISION

SHERRIE RUSSELL-BROWN

VS USDC NO. 1:09-cv-00257-MP -AK

USCA NO. _____________ 

THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES,THE UNIVERSITY OF

FLORIDA,LEVIN COLLEGE OF LAW,ROBERT H JERRY, II 

 TRANSMITTAL OF NOTICE OF APPEAL

The following documents are hereby transmitted to the Clerk, U. S. Court of Appeals.

The Certified copy of the appeal notice, docket entries, judgment/opinion/order appealed from 

are enclosed.

First Appeal Notice. 

Judge appealed from: Maurice M. Paul

Court Reporter(s): Christine Bordenave

Please acknowledge receipt on the enclosed copy of this transmittal to: GAINESVILLE DIVISION

SHEILA HURST-RAYBORN,

ACTING CLERK OF COURT

s/JUDY STONE

By: Judy Stone

Deputy Clerk 

401 SE 1st Avenue, Ste 243

September 14, 2010 Gainesville, Florida 32601

Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP -AK Document 148 Filed 09/14/10 Page 1 of 1
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-60350

Summary Calendar

 

STEFAN MOISIUC; LILIANA MOISIUC; RUDOLF MOISIUC,

Petitioners,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

Respondent.

- - - - - - - - - -

Petition for Review of an Order of

the Board of Immigration Appeals

USDC No. A72 450 300

- - - - - - - - - -

March 27, 1998

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Stefan Moisiuc, his wife Liliana, and their son Rudolf,

natives and citizens of Romania, have petitioned this court to

review a determination by the Board of Immigration Appeals

(“BIA”) that they should be deported. We DENY the Moisiucs’

petition because the record shows that the BIA’s determination is

supported by substantial evidence. Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78

F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996). 

PETITION DENIED.
Page 1 of 3

Case No. 5:10cv182-RH/EMT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

TYRONE M. HOWARD,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 5:10cv182-RH/EMT

FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION,

Respondent.

_________________________________/

ORDER DENYING THE PETITION AND

DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

This petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is before 

the court on the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, ECF No. 14. No 

objections have been filed. The report and recommendation is correct and is 

adopted as the court’s opinion.

Rule 11 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases requires a district court to 

“issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to 

the applicant.” Under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), a certificate of appealability may 

issue “only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-38 (2003); 

Case 5:10-cv-00182-RH-EMT Document 16 Filed 07/14/12 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

Case No. 5:10cv182-RH/EMT

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000); Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 

893 n.4 (1983); see also Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 402-13 (2000) (setting 

out the standards applicable to a § 2254 petition on the merits). As the Court said 

in Slack:

 To obtain a COA under § 2253(c), a habeas prisoner must make a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a 

demonstration that, under Barefoot, includes showing that reasonable 

jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition 

should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues 

presented were “ ‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed 

further.’ ” 

Slack, 529 U.S. at 483-84 (quoting Barefoot, 463 U.S. at 893 n.4). Further, in 

order to obtain a certificate of appealability when dismissal is based on procedural 

grounds, a petitioner must show, “at least, that jurists of reason would find it 

debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional 

right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court 

was correct in its procedural ruling.” Id. at 484. 

The petitioner has not made the required showing. 

For these reasons,

IT IS ORDERED: 

1. The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED.

2. The clerk must enter judgment stating, “The petition is DENIED with 

prejudice.” 

Case 5:10-cv-00182-RH-EMT Document 16 Filed 07/14/12 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

Case No. 5:10cv182-RH/EMT

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

4. The clerk must close the file.

SO ORDERED on July 14, 2012.

s/Robert L. Hinkle

United States District Judge

Case 5:10-cv-00182-RH-EMT Document 16 Filed 07/14/12 Page 3 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JERRY MCCANTS,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 4:09-cv-298-SPM/WCS

ROUSE, et al.,

Defendants.

______________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the court upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report

and Recommendation (doc. 31). Plaintiff has been mailed a copy and has been

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

Section 636(b)(1). Although Plaintiff was granted two extensions of time, no

objections have been filed. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, it

is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (doc. 31) is

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The case is dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies

and failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

3. The clerk is directed to note on the docket that this case was 
dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

DONE AND ORDERED this eighteenth day of November, 2010.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge