alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
BLD-230 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 12-2759

___________

IN RE: JOHNNIE D. YOUNG,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania

(Related to Civ. No. 3-09-cv-02513)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

July 19, 2012

Before: SCIRICA, SMITH and CHAGARES, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: July 27, 2012 )

_________

OPINION

_________

PER CURIAM

Petitioner, Johnnie Delantro Young, seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the 

Magistrate Judge to issue a report and recommendation addressing his petition for habeas 

corpus and compelling the District Court to rule on his habeas petition. He maintains that 

the petition has been ripe for disposition since “the end of July 2011.” For the following 

reasons, mandamus relief is not warranted. 
2

Young filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on 

December 22, 2009. Since that time there has been a constant stream of activity reflected 

on the District Court’s docket, including the following. The Commonwealth responded 

in March 2010, and in August 2010 the Magistrate Judge recommended the petition be 

denied. The District Court declined to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s report and 

recommendation and remanded the case to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. 

In February 2011, Young moved for summary judgment. In April 2011, the Magistrate 

Judge dismissed Young’s motion and ordered that he file one all-inclusive habeas corpus 

petition. Young did so and the Commonwealth responded in July 2011, after requesting 

and receiving an extension of time. In March 2012, Young filed an amended petition; the 

Commonwealth responded less than a month later. The most recent entry on the docket 

is a document Young filed on May 29, 2012, which the District Court treated as a 

supplement to his habeas petition. This mandamus petition followed on June 21. 

Issuance of a writ of mandamus is proper in only extraordinary circumstances. In 

re Grand Jury, 680 F.3d 328, 340 (3d Cir. 2012). Its traditional purpose is “to confine an 

inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction or to compel it to exercise 

its authority when it is its duty to do so.” Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass’n, 319 U.S. 21, 

26 (1943). A petitioner must demonstrate a “clear and indisputable” right to the writ. 

Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 403 (1976). While undue delay can 

amount to a failure to exercise jurisdiction, Madden v. Myers, 102 F.3d 74, 79 (3d Cir. 

1996), it is plain from the District Court’s docket that there has been no such undue delay 
3

in Young’s case. We are confident that the Magistrate Judge will issue a report and 

recommendation expeditiously. 

Accordingly, we will deny the mandamus petition.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2469 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2469

     To suspend for 3 years the duty on 3-Amino-3-methyl-1-pentyne.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 26, 2000

  Mr. Specter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To suspend for 3 years the duty on 3-Amino-3-methyl-1-pentyne.

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

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON 3-AMINO-3-METHYL-1-PENTYNE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.32.84       3-Amino-3-methyl-1- Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/
                         pentyne (CAS No.                                                   31/2002          ''.
                         18369-96-5)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2921.19.60)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

Exhibit 99.1 Certification of ChiefExecutive Officer

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, the undersigned officer of Alfa Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 (the“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15 (d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.
Exhibit 31.3

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to

Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)

as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 302 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Marissa Mayer, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Yahoo! Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2016; and
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: April 27, 2017



By:

/s/ Marissa A. MayerMarissa MayerChief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from GST USA's
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                      85,481,863
<SECURITIES>                                34,107,077
<RECEIVABLES>                               37,427,647
<ALLOWANCES>                               (5,481,222)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           163,196,353
<PP&E>                                     678,801,978
<DEPRECIATION>                            (62,116,080)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,120,692,900
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      428,010,270
<BONDS>                                    826,300,424
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                               (324,594,711)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,120,692,900
<SALES>                                    152,167,698
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           152,167,698
<CGS>                                      101,355,391
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              280,575,114
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            83,026,376
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          77,809,036
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (123,190,076)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (123,190,076)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                             (123,190,076)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2562 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2562

              To reduce temporarily the duty on Baytron M.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 16, 2000

 Mr. Thurmond introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
              To reduce temporarily the duty on Baytron M.

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

SECTION 1. REDUCTION OF DUTY ON BAYTRON M.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new subheading:

      

``    9902.29.34    A certain 3,4-    Free              No change         No change         On or before 12/
                     ethylenedioxyth                                                         31/2003          ''
                     iophene (CAS                                                                              .
                     No. 126213-50-
                     1) (provided
                     for in
                     subheading
                     2934.90.90)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AND EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(b) In connection with the quarterly report of NS Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Thomas J. Depenbrock, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify
that:  (1)
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. of the
Company. Date: May 5, 2005
    
    
    
    /s/ Thomas J. DepenbrockThomas J. DepenbrockChief Financial OfficerNS Group, Inc.
 A signed original of this written statement or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic
version of this written statement has been provided to NS Group, Inc. and will be retained by NS
Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM NS 
GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF
AND FOR THE THREE AND NINE MONTH PERIODS ENDED JUNE 28, 1997, INCLUDED IN THE 
COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY 
REFERENCE TO SUCH CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000745026
<NAME> NS GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-27-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-26-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           5,028
<SECURITIES>                                    16,155
<RECEIVABLES>                                   62,744
<ALLOWANCES>                                       930
<INVENTORY>                                     72,435
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               184,672
<PP&E>                                         275,659
<DEPRECIATION>                                 150,988
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 322,520
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           86,041
<BONDS>                                        162,689
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     53,047
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,411
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   322,520
<SALES>                                        349,130
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               349,130
<CGS>                                          301,696
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  301,696
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,298
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,088
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,740
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,348
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,348
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .47
        

</TABLE>
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2657

To suspend temporarily the duty on machines, and their parts, for use

in the manufacture of digital versatile discs (DVDs).

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 25, 2000

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

referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on machines, and their

parts, for use in the manufacture of digital versatile

discs (DVDs).

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

7 new heading:
2

•S 2657 IS

‘‘ 9902.84.13 Machines or mechanical appliances, whether

imported separately or as an

entirety, and

parts thereof, for

use in the manufacture of digital

versatile discs

(DVDs) (provided for in subheading

8477.10.90) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/03 ’’.

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 this section applies with respect to goods entered, or with3 drawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the

4 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Franklin Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Daniel T. Voelpel, the Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.


/s/ Daniel T. Voelpel
------------------------------------------
Daniel T. Voelpel
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
November 10, 2005


                                       19
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOSE L. GONZALEZ,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 500 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 13th day of December, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED.
#### WARREN, Respondent, *v.*HUMBLE et al., Appellants.

(No. 1,409.)

(Submitted March 4, 1902.

Decided May 6, 1902.)

*Appeal*— Time *for Taking*— Buies *of the Supreme*Court— *Briefs.*

*1.*An appeal from a judgment of the district court, rendered on an appeal from an inferior court, not taken within ninety days after entry of the judgment, as required by Code of Civil Procedure, Sec. 1723, Subd. 2, is too late and will be dismissed.

2. An order denying a new trial will foe affirmed on appeal where appellants’ brief fails entirely to comply with Subdivision 3a of Rule X of the Supreme Court, fails to make any reference by line or page to the transcript, and the appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial is not referred to or submitted in the statement.

*Appeal from District*Court, *Bavalli County; F. II.*Woody, *Judge.*

ActioN by James Warren against J. L. Humble and others. Eroni a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, defendants appeal. Appeal from judgment dismissed, and order denying a new trial

affirmed.

*Mr. Ilenry I.*Myers, and *Mr. William M. Draffen,*for Appellants.

ME. JUSTICE MILBUEN

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from a judgment and an order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial, as appears from the notice of appeal as it is set out in the transcript. The brief of appellants states that “from this judgment this appeal is prosecuted.”

There was no appearance for respondent in this court.

It appears from examination of the transcript that the judg*496ment appealed from was rendered in the district court on appeal from an inferior court. Tlie judgment in the district court was rendered and entered on December 21, 1898. The notice of appeal was served and filed on the 14th day of April, 1899. This court has no jurisdiction of this appeal, as the same was'not taken within ninety days after entry of the judgment. (Subdivision 2, Sec. 1723, Code of Civil Procedure; *Gallagher*v. Cornelius, 23 Mont. 27, 57 Pac. 447; *Morris*v. McLaughlin, 25 Mont. 151, 64 Pac. 219.)

The statement of the case in appellants’ brief fails entirely to comply with Subdivision 3 a of Rule N of this court, and fails, also, to make any reference by line or page- to the transcript. The appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial is not referred to or submitted to us in the statement. This rule has been adverted to so often by this court that it is unnecessary for us to set it out *in haec verba*herein. Therefore the order of the district court denying the motion for a new trial must be and is affirmed.

The appeal from the judgment is dismissed, and the order denying the motion for a new trial is affirmed.
# C o urt o f A ppe a ls

o f th e S ta te o f G e o rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 5 A0 30 2 . UNI TED GAMI NG, LLC v

. NI R VANA RASHED, I NC.

This ap p eal w as d o c keted o n Sep tember 4, 2024, mak ing the ap p ellant’ s brief

c o ntaining an enu meratio ns o f erro r d u e o n Sep tember 24, 2024. See Co u rt o f

A p p eals Ru le 23 (a). The ap p ellant has f ailed to f ile a brief to d ate. A c c o rd ingly, the

ap p eal is D I SM I SSED

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o f G e o r g i a

C l e r k ’ s O f

f i c e ,

A t l a n t a ,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I c e r t i f y t h a t th e a b o v e i s a t r ue e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o f t h e Co u r t o f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.

W i t n e s s m y s i g n a t ur e a nd t h e s e a l o f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 

## October 04, 2024

10/04/2024
#### Henrietta Andrews, Appellant, v. George W. Allen, as Administrator, etc., of John W. Allen, Deceased, Respondent.

Motion granted on default.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

JARA C. UZENDA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

No. 97-1841

AMERICAN REPUBLIC INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.

Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge.

(CA-96-304-4-22)

Submitted: May 19, 1998

Decided: June 3, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and

HALL, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Jara C. Uzenda, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Wilson Buyck, Jr., WILLCOX, MCLEOD, BUYCK & WILLIAMS, P.A., Florence, South

Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Jara C. Uzenda appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of American Republic in her breach of contract claim.

Finding no error in the district court's order, we affirm.

This Court reviews a grant of summary judgment de novo. See

Higgins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 863 F.2d 1162, 1167 (4th

Cir. 1988). Summary judgment is properly granted when there are no

genuine issues of material fact and when the record taken as a whole

could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the non-moving party.

See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). All reasonable inferences are to be drawn in favor of the non-moving party. See

Cole v. Cole, 633 F.2d 1083, 1092 (4th Cir. 1980).

Uzenda was a career agent for American Republic. Her suit

involves the payment of commissions following the termination of the

contract between the parties. According to Uzenda, the contract provision regarding these payments is ambiguous and should be construed

against American Republic. We agree with the district court, however, that the contract is not ambiguous. Rather, the contract clearly

states that an agent's commissions vest in accordance with the terms

of the contract, the Commission Schedules, and the Vesting Schedule.

The Vesting Schedule, in turn, provides that "if termination of an

agent's contract occurs after the anniversary date of the agent's contract," the agent will receive a percentage of her commissions based

upon the length of the agent's service with the company.

We have considered all of Uzenda's arguments suggesting alternative interpretations and find them to be without merit. Accordingly,

we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of

American Republic. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

 2
before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 3