alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

XAVIER TYRONE MOORE,

Petitioner,

vs. Case No. 3:10cv236/MCR/EMT

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

_____________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Petitioner commenced this action

by filing a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). On July 9, 2010, this court entered an

order giving Petitioner thirty (30) days in which to pay the filing fee or submit a fully completed

application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 3). Petitioner failed to comply with the order;

therefore, on August 18, 2010, the court issued an order requiring Petitioner to show cause, within

twenty (20) days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the

court (Doc. 4). The time for compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed and Petitioner

has failed to pay the filing fee or submit a fully completed application to proceed in forma pauperis.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to comply with an

order of the court.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 9th day of September 2010.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only, and does not control. A copy of

objections shall be served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of

appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d

698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988).

Case No: 3:10cv236/MCR/EMT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:09cv395/RV/EMT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

and AVENGE INCORPORATED,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER AND NOTICE

The motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Avenge Incorporated 

(doc. 40) will be taken under advisement by the Court on June 8, 2010. Because the

Court does not contemplate scheduling a hearing on this motion, the parties are

directed to file and serve affidavits and any other documents or materials authorized

to be filed under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure prior to the above date. Only

those pleadings and evidentiary materials currently in the record or filed prior to the

above date will be considered by the Court in ruling on this motion. A motion for

summary judgment will result in a final judgment being entered for the moving party,

of course, if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions,

affidavits, and any other appropriate evidentiary materials properly filed in the record

show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party

is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P.; Griffith v.

Wainwright, 772 F.2d 822, 825 (11th Cir. 1985); Moore v. State of Florida, 703 F.2d

516 (11th Cir. 1983).

DONE AND ORDERED this 18th day of May, 2010.

 /s/Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

Senior U. S. District Judge
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Soy Energy, LLC (the
Company) for the quarter ended April 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Charles Sand,
President and Chief Executive Officer, 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, as amended; and                    
| |    |                                                                                                                                                       
| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
 material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
 Company.

| |                                                     
| | ----------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Charles
 Sand                                   
| |                                                     
| | Charles
 Sand, President and Chief Executive Officer
| | (Principal
 Executive Officer)                      
| |                                                     
| | Dated: June
 15, 2009                               

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 3, 2018

s1220 

# Order

Clerk January 3, 2018

154152

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 154152

COA: 333066

Ottawa CC: 15

- 039395

- FC

RYAN LEE BOES,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

By order of March 7, 2017, the application for leave to appeal the June 29, 2016

order of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decisions in People v

Steanhouse (Docket No. 152849) and People v Masroor (Docket Nos. 152946

- 8). On

order of the Court, the cases having been decided on July 24, 2017, 500 Mich 453 (2017),

the application is again considered, and it is DENIED, becau se we are not persuaded that

the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
EXHIBIT 32

WRITTEN CERTIFICATION of
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER and CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT to 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of EFJ, Inc. (the "Company"), each hereby certifies that, to the best of each
of their knowledge:

the
Company's Report on Form 10-K for the annual period ending December 31, 2004 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

| |  | /s/MICHAEL E. JALBERTMichael E. Jalbert
Chief Executive Officer
March 2, 2005
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | /s/MASSOUD SAFAVIMassoud Safavi
Chief Financial Officer
March 2, 2005        

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT
31.2


CERTIFICATIONS









1.    I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NanoTech Entertainment,
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.    I
am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and
internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have;




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




(b)
 Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my supervision,
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles;




(c)
 Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report my 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 period covered by this report
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and




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




(a)
 All significant deficiencies and material weakness 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:  May
      24, 2010
              /s/ Ted D. Campbell IITed
      D. Campbell IIChief
      Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002



In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Mill City Ventures III, Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2018, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Douglas M. Polinsky, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Joseph A. Geraci, II, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. §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 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.







| | /s/
    Douglas M. Polinsky 
| | ----------------------------
| | Douglas M. Polinsky         
| | Chief Executive Officer     
| |                             
| | November 13,
    2018       
| |                             
| |                             
| | /s/ Joseph
    A. Geraci, II
| | Joseph A. Geraci, II        
| | Chief Financial Officer     
| |                             
| | November 13,
    2018
Page 1 of 1

Case No. 5:10cv288-RH/EMT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

RICARDO SANCHEZ,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 5:10cv288-RH/EMT

JOSE L. SANCHEZ, JR. et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AND REMANDING TO 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS

This case is before the court on the magistrate judge’s report and 

recommendation, ECF No. 90. No objections have been filed. Upon 

consideration,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED and adopted as the court’s 

opinion. The defendant Jose L. Sanchez, Jr.’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 77, is 

DENIED. This matter is remanded to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

SO ORDERED on September 2, 2014.

s/Robert L. Hinkle

United States District Judge

Case 5:10-cv-00288-RH-EMT Document 96 Filed 09/03/14 Page 1 of 1
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5258 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand eligibility to receive 

refundable tax credits for coverage under a qualified health plan. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 13, 2018 

Mr. DESAULNIER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand 

eligibility to receive refundable tax credits for coverage 

under a qualified health plan. 

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 ‘‘Affordable Health In5 surance for the Middle Class Act’’. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5258 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR REFUNDABLE 

2 CREDITS FOR COVERAGE UNDER QUALIFIED 

3 HEALTH PLANS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 36B(c)(1)(A) of the In5 ternal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘but 

6 does not exceed 400 percent’’. 

7 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table in sec8 tion 36B(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

9 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘up to 400%’’ and inserting 

10 ‘‘or higher’’. 

11 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

12 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

13 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

CENTENNIAL BANK,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 04:11-CV-28 RH/WCS

PETER S. ROSEN; MIKE PAGOZALSKI

a/k/a MICHAEL PAGOZALSKI; DUSTIN

CALDWELL; MICHAEL CURETON d/b/a

CURETON PLUMBING, INC.; SOUTHWOOD 

RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOC., INC.;

FIRST CAPITAL BANK; UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA, DEPT. OF TREASURY, INTERNAL

REVENUE SERVICE; RO-MAC LUMBER & SUPPLY

OF TALLAHASSEE, INC.; ASHLEY ANDERSON;

ACIC PROPERTIES, INC.; and REGIONS BANK,

Defendants.

_______________________________________________/

DEFENDANTS ROSEN AND PAGOZALSKI'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION 

FOR ORDER DIRECTING DEPOSIT OF RENTS

Defendants, PETER S. ROSEN and MIKE PAGOZALSKI, respond to Plaintiff 

CENTENNIAL BANK'S Motion for Order Directing Deposit of Rents, as follows:

1. Defendants do not deny that plaintiff has perfected its assignment of rent 

proceeds; however, the court's order should make provision for:

a. Defendants placing the net rent in an escrow account to be agreed upon by 

the parties rather than the registry of the court, so as to avoid unnecessary expense; 

b. The establishment up front of a method for disbursing the funds with 

certain categories of expenses, such as monthly utility bills, maintenance, real estate taxes, and 

insurance, being paid automatically.

Case 4:11-cv-00028-RH-WCS Document 32 Filed 04/08/11 Page 1 of 2
c. Other expenses to be paid only after proof of their need has been 

submitted to plaintiff and then paid only if no objection is made in 7 to 10 days;

d. The court to determine which necessary expenses will be paid if there are 

insufficient funds to pay all of them; and 

e. Defendants paying the necessary expenses from the rent proceeds.

2. As for the lists and documents requested by plaintiff in paragraph five of its 

motion, defendants have no objection to producing them; however, the information must be 

obtained from an outside management company with whom defendants have contracted.

/s/ David B. Switalski_________

DAVID B. SWITALSKI

Florida Bar No.: 0984991

1018 Thomasville Rd., Ste. 111-A

Tallahassee, Florida 32303

(telephone) (850) 222-6200

(facsimile) (850) 224-0700

dbsattorney@gmail.com

Attorney for Defendants Rosen

and Pagozalski

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been sent by 

CM/ECF to Megan F. Fry, Clark, Partington, Hart, P.O. Box 13010, Pensacola, FL 32591-3010 

and Paul Alan Sprowls, U.S. Attorney's Office, 111 North Adams Street, 4th Floor, Tallahassee, 

Florida 32301 this 8th day of April , 2011.

/s/ David B. Switalski

ATTORNEY

Case 4:11-cv-00028-RH-WCS Document 32 Filed 04/08/11 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

AVELINO NAZARIO,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:10-cv-00341-MP -WCS

BRIAN JOHNSON, TALLAHASSEE POLICE DEPARTMENT,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 8, Report and Recommendation re 1 Complaint

Filed by Avelino Nazario. The Magistrate Judge has recommended this case be dismissed for

failure to comply with an order to prosecute. Plaintiff failed to comply with the Order to file an

Amended Complaint and the Report and Recommendation has been returned undeliverable via

U.S. Mail. As such, Plaintiff has not objected to the recommendation, and the time for doing so

has passed. Finding no plain error, it is accordingly

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, Doc. 8, is ADOPTED

and incorporated herein. 

2. This complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to comply with an

order to prosecute.

DONE AND ORDERED this 22nd day of December, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

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

**San Antonio, Texas**

Ju ly 30, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00233

- CR

Abrosia LERMA , Jr.

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. B17636

Honorable Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The Appellant’s Response to Notice of Late Brief and Motion to Extend Time to File

Appellant's Brief is hereby GRANTED. Time is extended to August 28, 2019.

It is s o ORDERED on July 30, 2019

.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _______________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JEFNEY PHILISTIN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D21

- 2124

[ June 23, 2022 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seven teenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Martin S. Fein , Judge; L.T. Case No. 06

- 000505CF10A

.

Jefney Philistin, Sneads , pro se

.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and MaryEllen M.

Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

L EVINE

, C ONNER and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

TERESA YATES and LEE YATES,

Plaintiffs,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv226/RS-GRJ

WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP,

Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is Notice of Settlement (Doc. 54). Pursuant to Local Rule 16.2(D), it

is ordered:

1. This case is dismissed from the active docket of the court.

2. In the event that the settlement is not consummated, the court reserves

jurisdiction, upon motion filed by any party within sixty days of the date of this Order, to

amend or vacate and set aside this Order and reinstate the case.

3. The clerk is directed to close the file of this case for administrative

purposes, and upon the expiration of sixty days without activity, the clerk is directed to

close the case in its entirety for all purposes.

ORDERED on August 29, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:10-cv-00226-RS-GRJ Document 55 Filed 08/29/11 Page 1 of 1
# C_2011052EN.01000101.xml

| 18.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6111 — Huaneng/OTPPB/Intergen)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 52/01

On 11 February 2011, 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 32011M6111. 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 32011M6111. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
EXHIBIT 32.2


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 Of THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, David B. Menzel, Chief Financial Officer of Echo Global Logistics, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, that:





(1)   The Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010 (the "Form 10-Q") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and


(2)   The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





August 13, 2010/s/ DAVID B. MENZELDavid B. MenzelChief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

WINNIE THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 3:10-cv-318/RS-EMT

CINCINNATI INS. CO.,

a foreign corporation, 

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

ORDER

The relief requested in Plaintiff’s Motion to Bring Blackberry Devices and/or 

Cellular Telephones into the Courthouse (Doc. 101) is GRANTED.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Attorneys Dennis Larry, Virginia Buchanan, William Elebash, and Charles 

Wiggins may bring cellular telephones or other communication devices inside the 

courthouse. 

2. At all times the devices will be powered off while in the courtroom. 

3. The devices may be used in other areas of the courthouse only for the purposes 

directly related to this case in the least obtrusive manner. 

ORDERED on May 10, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00318-RS-EMT Document 104 Filed 05/10/11 Page 1 of 1