alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0133 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CHARLES ANDREW DRURY,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including December 27, 2021, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 24 2021

11/24/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0133
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6187

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

EMMANUEL UZUEGBUNAM,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.

(CR-96-43, CA-98-517)

Submitted: May 25, 1999 Decided: June 2, 1999

Before ERVIN, WILKINS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Emmanuel Uzuegbunam, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Gerald McBride,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Emmanuel Uzuegbunam seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See United States v. Uzuegbunam, Nos. CR96-43; CA-98-517 (E.D. Va. Feb. 1, 1999). We deny Appellant’s motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
O C W E N




                       ANNUAL SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
                       PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB

March 8, 2007

RE: CMLTI 2006-HE3

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Reporting Period"), Ocwen
Loan Servicing, LLC ("OLS") furnishes this annual servicer compliance
statement pursuant to Item 1123 of Regulation AB, indicating its compliance
with the servicing standards of the Securities & Exchange Commission as set
forth in Regulation AB, 17 CFR 229.1100, et seq., ("Regulation AB"). In this
regard, I make the following representations. which are true to the best of
my knowledge and belief in all material respects.

1.  A review of the servicing activities of OLS during the Reporting Period,
    and of its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as
    of December 1, 2006 (the "Agreement"), has been performed under my
    supervision.

2.  To the best of my knowledge, based on this review, OLS has fulfilled all
    of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout
    the Reporting Period.


                                               By: /s/ Ronald M. Faris
                                                   -------------------
                                               Name: Ronald M. Faris
                                               Title: President




                     Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC
                 1661 Worthington Road Suite 100
                       Centrepark West
                  West Palm Beach, FL 33409
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4944 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4944

  To require the submission of a report to the Congress on parasitic 
                     disease among poor Americans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 24, 2014

   Mr. Johnson of Georgia (for himself and Mr. Smith of New Jersey) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require the submission of a report to the Congress on parasitic 
                     disease among poor Americans.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Neglected Infections of Impoverished 
Americans Act of 2014''.

SEC. 2. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE CURRENT STATE OF PARASITIC DISEASES 
              THAT HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED AMONG THE POOREST AMERICANS.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 12 months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
report to the Congress on the epidemiology of, impact of, and 
appropriate funding required to address neglected diseases of poverty, 
including neglected parasitic diseases such as--
            (1) Chagas disease;
            (2) cysticercosis;
            (3) toxocariasis;
            (4) toxoplasmosis;
            (5) trichomoniasis;
            (6) the soil-transmitted helminths; and
            (7) other related parasitic diseases, as designated by the 
        Secretary.
    (b) Required Information.--The report under subsection (a) should 
provide the information necessary to guide future health policy to--
            (1) accurately evaluate the current state of knowledge 
        concerning diseases described in such subsection and define 
        gaps in such knowledge; and
            (2) address the threat of such diseases.
                                 <all>
```
#### Aaron A. De Grauw, Respondent, *v.*Samuel A. Warner, Appellant.

*Trespass upon lands*— *who cannot maintain an action therefor.*

In an action "brought to recover damages for trespass upon lands, alleged to have been committed in 1889, the proof showed that the defendant went into possession of the premises in 1887, immediately after a conveyance of.the property to him, and had remained in possession ever since.

*Held,*that that fact was fatal to the plaintiff's action.' A person out of possession of real estate cannot maintain an action for trespass while he is out of possession.

Appeal by the defendant, Samuel A. Warner, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Queens on the 26th day of October, 1892, upon the verdict of a jury for six cents damages, rendered after a trial at the Queens County Circuit.

The action was brought to recover damages for trespass, as alleged, upon the plaintiff’s lands by the defendant.

*Charles DeKay*Townsend, for the appellant.

*Henry A.*Monfort, for the respondent.

Pratt, J.:

The conveyance to defendant includes the *locus in quo*and so do several of the instruments execnted at the time with intent to vest the title in him. The conveyance from plaintiff to defendant’s grantor, executed and delivered at the same time, is defective by the omission of one or more courses, and the description is, therefore. imperfect. But, as plaintiff had knowledge of all the conveyances and of their object, was present when they were delivered, gave no notice of any claim on his part, and received the whole of *10tiie consideration money, we think be is clearly estopped from advancing any claim to tbe premises.

Tbe action is for trespass alleged to have been committed in 1889. Tbe proof is that tbe defendant went into possession in 1887, immediately after tbe conveyance to him, and has remained in possession ever since. That proof was not disputed, and the correctness was conceded. Tbe fact is fatal to this action.

One out of possession cannot maintain an action for trespass while he is out of possession. (*Wood*v. Lafayette, 68 N. Y. 181.)

Tbe judgment must be reversed and new trial must be bad, with costs to abide event.

BeowN, P. J., and Dyeman, J., concurred in result.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18U.S.C. § 1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of First Chester County Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Eric A. Segal, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)          The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Date:  August 18, 2010 |                             |
|-----------------------------|----------------------------------|
|                        | /s/  Eric A. Segal               |
|                        | Eric  A. Segal                   |
|                        | Interim  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
United States

Securities and ExchangeCommission

Washington, D.C.  20549

 

 

Form 10-Q

 

 

(MarkOne)

[X]   QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TOSECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011

 

or

 

[]   TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THESECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the transition period from _________to _________

 

Commission file number 0-14533

 

 

OXFORD RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ILIMITED PARTNERSHIP

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

 

55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089

Greenville, South Carolina  29602

(Address of principal executive offices)

 

(864) 239-1000

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to befiled by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during thepreceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was requiredto file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements forthe past 90 days.  

[X]Yes  [ ] No

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted onits corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to besubmitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (232.405 of thischapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that theregistrant was required to submit and post such files). [ ] Yes  [ ] No

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, anaccelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reportingcompany.  See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “acceleratedfiler” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act). [ ] Yes  [X] No
## F IFTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ C ase No. 5D 23- 1710 LT Case No. 2018

- DR

- 001620 -A

_____________________________ A USTIN Y ANKY , A ppellant,

v. J ENA M ILLER , A ppellee.

_____________________________ O n appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Johns County
. Chris topher S. Ferebee , Judge
. R ick A. Sichta and Susanne K. Sichta, of The Sichta Firm, L L C, Jacksonville, for Appellant. A dam J. Kohl, of A dam J. Kohl, P.A. , Jacksonville , for Appell ee . N ovember 14, 2023
P ER C URIAM . A FFIRMED . E DWARDS , C.J., L AMBERT , and M AC I VER , JJ., concur .2 _____________________________ N ot final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 .

_____________________________
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

CHARLES BASS,

Petitioner

v.

THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

PENNSYLVANIA THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCI-DALLAS,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 108 EM 2014

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 24 th day of September, 2014, the Application for Leave to File

Original Process is GRANTED , and the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED

.
#### HANNAH EVERSON, Respondent, *v.*ANDREW McMULLEN, Appellant.

*Action for dower under the Code of Civil Procedure*— the *plaintiff, if successful, is entitled to costs, of course, under subdivision*1 *of section*8228 *of the said Code.*

•Since the adoption of the Code of Civil Procedure the plaintiff, in an action brought for dower, if successful, is entitled to costs, of course, under subdivision 1 of section 3228 of the said Code, as it is an action to recover “ an interest in real property” and is triable by a jury.

*Aikman*v. *Hcvrsell*(31 Hun, 635) distinguished.

*579Appeal from a judgment entered in Ulster county upon the trial of this action by the court, the parties having waived a jury trial.

The action, which was brought to recover dower, has already been before the General Term, where the principal question involved therein was determined in favor of the plaintiff, the decision being reported in 42 Hun, 369. The question now presented was whether or not the plaintiff, having succeeded, was entitled to costs, of course, or only in the discretion of the court.

*Preston & Chipp,*for the appellant.

*G. D. B.*Hasbrouck, for the respondent.

Landon, J.:

Costs were properly awarded the plaintiff. Dower is *“*an interest in real property ” whereof the widow is endowed, and although technically the interest is a chose in action or mere claim, and not an estate until admeasured, still the *“*action for dower,” which is now-regulated by our Code of Civil Procedure, is an action to recover the interest in real estate, whether that interest be admeasured upon the land itself or its equivalent recovered in money. (4 Kent Com., 35; *Payne*v. Becker, 87 N. Y., 153; Code Civil Pro., §§ 1607-1613-1617, 1618.) The action for dower is triable by jury. (Id., § 968.) Hence plaintiff is entitled to costs *“*of course.” (Sec. 3228, sub. 1.)

Our attention is called to *Aikman*v. *Harsell*(31 Hun, 635). That action was tried before the last nine chapters of the Code of Procedure took effect. It was there held that the costs were in the discretion of the court, the court holding that there were no statutory provisions in reference to the costs of the action. Without questioning the propriety of the ruling in that case, we think the Code now gives the plaintiff costs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Learned, P. J., and Williams, J., concurred.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATIONS
OF THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Nutrition 21, Inc., a New York
corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),
Michael A. Zeher, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify,
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to
his knowledge:




(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.




/s/    
      Michael A. ZeherMichael
      A. Zeher
                  President
      and Chief Executive
Officer


November
13, 2009




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Nutrition 21, Inc. and will be retained by Nutrition 21, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.





19


---
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

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

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Fedders Corporation, a Delaware
Corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Robert L.
Laurent, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to
my knowledge:

          (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.


                                        /s/ ROBERT L. LAURENT, JR.
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Robert L. Laurent, Jr.
                                        Chief Financial Officer

Date: December 30, 2005


                                       33
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ROBERT MORRIS ANTHONY,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 79 WAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 26th day of August, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                      Exhibit 23


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
pertaining to: the 1995 Stock Option Plan as amended, 1996 Directors' Stock
Option Plan, and the Stock Option Agreement entered into, effective January 4,
1995, by and between Surnsie Assisted Living, Inc. and David W. Faeder (Form
S-8, No. 333-05257); Sunrise Assisted Living, Inc. 1996 Non-Incentive Stock
Option Plan (Form S-8, No. 333-21817); 1997 Stock Option Plan (Form S-8, No.
333-26837); the $150 million of 5 1/2% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2002
(Form S-3, No. 333-34365); the 1996 Directors' Stock Option Plan, as Amended
(Form S-8, No. 333-57291); the 1998 Stock Option Plan (Form S-8, No. 333-57293);
the 1999 Stock Option Plan (Form S-8, No. 333-78313); and the Karrington Health,
Inc. 1996 Incentive Stock Plan (Form S-8, No. 333-78543), respectively, of our
report dated March 8, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Sunrise Assisted Living, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1999.





                                                    /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

McLean, VA
March 28, 2000
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection  with the  Annual  Report of  Titanium  Metals  Corporation  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-K for the period  ending  December 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Annual Report"),
we, Steven L. Watson,  Vice Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of
the  Company,  and Bruce P.  Inglis,  Vice  President  - Finance  and  Corporate
Controller of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1. the Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the
Company




March 24, 2006


/s/ Steven L. Watson
-----------------------------------
Steven L. Watson
Vice Chairman of the Board and
   Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Bruce P. Inglis
-----------------------------------
Bruce P. Inglis
Vice President - Finance and Corporate
   Controller




Note: The certification  the registrant  furnishes in this exhibit is not deemed
"filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934,  as
amended,  or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that Section.  Registration
Statements or other documents filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission
shall not incorporate this exhibit by reference,  except as otherwise  expressly
stated in such filing.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 98 (Friday, May 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 28672]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12313]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 7022]


Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation; Lifting of 
Nonproliferation Measures Against Two Russian Entities

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: A determination has been made, pursuant to Section 6 of 
Executive Order 12938 of November 14, 1994, as amended, to remove 
nonproliferation measures on two Russian entities.

DATES: Effective Date: May 21, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela K. Durham, Office of Missile 
Threat Reduction, Bureau of International Security and 
Nonproliferation, Department of State (202-647-4930).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the authorities vested in the 
President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of 
America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (``IEEPA''), the National Emergencies Act (50 
U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et 
seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and Section 6 of 
Executive Order 12938 of November 14, 1994, as amended, a determination 
was made on May 12, 2010, that it is in the foreign policy or national 
security interests of the United States to remove the restrictions 
imposed pursuant to Sections 4(b), 4(c), and 4(d) of the Executive 
Order on the following Russian entities, their sub-units and 
successors:

1. D. Mendeleyev University of Chemical Technology of Russia
2. Moscow Aviation Institute

    These restrictions were imposed on January 8, 1999 (see 64 FR 
2935).

    Dated: May 17, 2010.
C.S. Eliot Kang,
Acting Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and 
Nonproliferation, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-12313 Filed 5-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-27-P
<PAGE>




                                                                      Exhibit 32


                             REX Stores Corporation
                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         The undersigned officers of REX Stores Corporation (the "Company")
hereby certify, to their knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2006, which this certificate accompanies,
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained therein fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.



/s/ Stuart A. Rose
Stuart A. Rose


/s/ Douglas L. Bruggeman
Douglas L. Bruggeman


Dated: September 6, 2006