alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT E 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2894-5 Filed: 07/08/19 Entered: 07/08/19 15:13:07 Page 1

of 2
650 California Street, Suite 1900

San Francisco, CA 94108

Email: admin@kellerbenvenutti.com

Billing Statement No. 1192

Date: 07/08/2019

Due Upon Receipt

PG&E Corporation

Attn: Janet Loduca

77 Beale Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

Statement of Account

Outstanding Balance New Charges Total Balance

$13,824.57 + $5,150.68 = $18,975.25

00138-31 PG&E

Chapter 11 representation- Expenses

Type Date Description Quantity Rate Fees and

Expenses

Total

Expense 05/01/2019 E116 Trial transcripts: eScribers Invoice No. 230773 for 2/13/19 hearing (paid 3/25/19). 1.00 $169.40 $169.40

Expense 05/01/2019 E116 Trial transcripts: eScribers Invoice No. 230776 for 2/13/19 hearing (paid 3/25/19). 1.00 $132.00 $132.00

Expense 05/01/2019 E116 Trial transcripts: eScribers Invoice No. 233606 for 2/26/19 hearing (paid 4/8/19). 1.00 $199.65 $199.65

Expense 05/01/2019 E116 Trial transcripts: eScribers Invoice No 247273 for 341 hearing (paid 4/8/19). 1.00 $1,149.50 $1,149.50

Expense 05/08/2019 E116 Trial transcripts: eScribers Invoice No. 239861 for 3/27/19 hearing (paid 5/8/19). 1.00 $605.00 $605.00

Expense 05/09/2019 E112 Court fees: Pro Hac Vice fees for Timothy Cameron (Cravath). 1.00 $310.00 $310.00

Expense 05/13/2019 E107 Delivery services/messengers: Court runner and service for deliveries on April 2, 5, 8,

9, and 10 (Nationwide Invoice No. 356572).

1.00 $389.38 $389.38

Expense 05/14/2019 E116 Trial transcripts: eScribers Invoice No. 249181 for 5/8/19 hearing. 1.00 $683.65 $683.65

Expense 05/14/2019 E116 Trial transcripts: eScribers Invoice No. 249258 for 5/9/19 hearing. 1.00 $1,076.90 $1,076.90

Expense 05/16/2019 E107 Delivery services/messengers: Court runner and service for deliveries on April 19, 22,

23, 24 and 30 (Nationwide Invoice No. 356976).

1.00 $435.20 $435.20

Time Keeper Position Time Rate Fees and Expenses

Total

Fees and Expenses Subtotal $5,150.68

Fees and Expenses Total $5,150.68

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2894-5 Filed: 07/08/19 Entered: 07/08/19 15:13:07 Page 2

of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       1,263,832
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  158,938
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,422,770
<PP&E>                                      11,466,297
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,798,160
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,090,907
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          712,791
<BONDS>                                      6,094,752
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,283,364
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,090,907
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               471,689
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               348,323
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             200,213
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (76,847)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (76,847)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3591 Filed: 08/19/19 Entered: 08/19/19 11:06:40 Page 1 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3591 Filed: 08/19/19 Entered: 08/19/19 11:06:40 Page 2 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3591 Filed: 08/19/19 Entered: 08/19/19 11:06:40 Page 3 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3591 Filed: 08/19/19 Entered: 08/19/19 11:06:40 Page 4 of

4
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5410 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5410

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 25 New York Avenue in Sound Beach, New York, as the ``John Moerlins 
                             Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 8, 2014

    Mr. Bishop of New York introduced the following bill; which was 
      referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 25 New York Avenue in Sound Beach, New York, as the ``John Moerlins 
                             Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. JOHN MOERLINS POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 25 New York Avenue in Sound Beach, New York, shall be known 
and designated as the ``John Moerlins Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``John 
Moerlins Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
exv10w41







EXHIBIT NO. 10 (41)




TERMINATION ADDENDUM




attaching to and forming a part of

SURETY EXCESS OF LOSS REINSURANCE CONTRACT AS RESPECTS ONLY

SURETY BUSINESS FOR THE DICK CORPORATION

(originally effective: January 1, 2005)

(hereinafter referred to as “Contract”)




	 	 	 
	ISSUED TO:

	 	WESTERN SURETY COMPANY

UNIVERSAL SURETY OF AMERICA

SURETY BONDING COMPANY OF AMERICA

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “Company”)
	 
	 	 
	ISSUED BY:

	 	CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY

(hereinafter referred to as “Reinsurer”)






     It is hereby mutually understood and agreed that, effective June 30, 2009, the captioned
Contract, as previously amended by Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, shall be terminated. In light of
such termination and pursuant to Article 4 — Commencement and Expiration, the Reinsurer exercises
its option to cease acceptance of any additional Bonds under this Contract. The Company and the
Reinsurer agree that there are no outstanding Bonds which shall result from bids already released
by the Company as of this date of termination.



     All other terms and conditions of the captioned Contract shall remain unchanged.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties acknowledge that no intermediary is involved in or brought about
this transaction, and the parties hereto, by their authorized representatives, have executed this
Termination Addendum to the Contract:



on this                                          day of                                          2009.




WESTERN SURETY COMPANY





			
	By:	 	 







			
	Printed Name:	 	 







			
	Title:	 	 






Termination Addendum — Surety Excess of Loss (Dick Corporation)

Effective: June 30, 2009

Page 1




 









 







and on this                                          day of                                          2009.



UNIVERSAL SURETY OF AMERICA





			
	By:	 	 







			
	Printed Name:	 	 







			
	Title:	 	 

	 




and on this                                          day of                                          2009.




SURETY BONDING COMPANY OF AMERICA





			
	By:	 	 







			
	Printed Name:	 	 







			
	Title:	 	 

	 




and on this                                          day of                                          2009.




CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY





			
	By:	 	 







			
	Printed Name:	 	 







			
	Title:	 	 






Termination Addendum — Surety Excess of Loss (Dick Corporation)

Effective: June 30, 2009

Page 2
#### David H. Donovan v. J. Wall Griswold and B. Frank Griswold.

*Negotiable Instruments—Guaranty—Presumption of.*

1. The presumption of guaranty arises where a stranger to a note writes his name upon the back thereof in blank.

2. This presumption may be overcome, but the burden of proof is upon the person so signing.

3. Whether a guaranty was absolute or special is a question of fact.

4. An absolute guaranty does not depend upon the use of diligence by the holder.

[Opinion filed February 10, 1891.]

*617Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Elliott Anthony, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. Miller, Starr *&*Leman, for appellant.

Mr. Parke E. Simmons, for appellees.

Waterman, J.

Appellant, before its delivery, wrote his name upon the back of a promissory note, made by one F. M. Bowes, payable in four months after date, to the order of Griswold Brothers.

The question presented to the court below was whether, under the circumstances attending such writing, he became a guarantor. Presumptively he placed his name there as a guarantor; this presumption may be overturned, but the burden of so doing is on the party who thus places his name upon a promissory note. We see no reason for holding the conclusion of the court below upon this controverted question of fact to have been unwarranted.

Whether the guarantee was absolute or special was a question of fact, and the finding of the court below as to this matter was fully justified by the evidence.

An absolute guaranty does not depend upon the use of diligence by the holder. Penny v. Crane Bros. Mfg. Co., 80 Ill. 244; Stowell v. Raymond, 83 Ill. 120; Parkhurst v. Vail, 73 Ill. 343.

The judgment of the court must be affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-40070

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FELIPE MILLAN-FLORES,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:15-CR-844-1

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Felipe Millan-Flores

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Millan-Flores has filed a response. The record is not 

sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Millan-Flores’s

claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 9, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-40070 Document: 00513629357 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2016
No. 16-40070

2

claims without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 

F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein, as well as Millan-Flores’s response. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused 

from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See

5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Millan-Flores motion for the appointment of new counsel is 

DENIED as untimely. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th 

Cir. 1998).

 Case: 16-40070 Document: 00513629357 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/09/2016
#### John T. Wickens, Respondent, v. Thomas Foster, Appellant.

— Judgment and order reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event, opinion by

Hardin, P. J.;

dissenting opinion by Follett, J.
#### Lyman Bickford and another, Appellants, v. Isaac H. Sutherland, Respondent.

— Order affirmed, with costs to abide the event, on the opinion of

Dwight. J.,

at circuit.
Exhibit 32

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 this Amended Annual Report of TransAct Energy Corp.. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Henry Andrews, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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/ Henry Andrews               *

Chief Executive Officer and

Chief Financial Officer

 

June 29, 2009
EXHIBIT A

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4579-1 Filed: 11/05/19 Entered: 11/05/19 14:28:11 Page 1

of 2
COMPENSATION BY PROFESSIONAL

SEPTEMBER 1, 2019 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2019

The attorneys and paraprofessionals who rendered legal services in these Chapter 11 Cases from 

September 1, 2019 through September 30, 2019 (the “Fee Period”) are:

NAME OF 

PROFESSIONAL: POSITION

YEAR

ADMITTED

HOURLY

RATE

TOTAL

HOURS

BILLED

TOTAL

COMPENSATION

Tobias S. Keller Partner 1990 800 36.4 $29,120

Peter J. Benvenutti Partner 1974 800 65.1 $52,080

Jane Kim Partner 20031 650 23.6 $15,340

Keith A. McDaniels Of Counsel 1997 600 3.6 $2,160

Dara L. Silveira Associate 2010 400 84.8 $33,920

Thomas B. Rupp Associate 2011 400 57.5 $23,000

Jacob Bodden Paralegal Trainee N/A 150 8.6 $1,290

Hadley Roberts-Donnelly Paralegal Trainee N/A 150 11.4 $1,710

Total Professionals: 291 $158,620

1 Member of the California Bar since 2014

PROFESSIONALS

TOTALS:

BLENDED RATE

(rounded to nearest 

dollar)

TOTAL HOURS 

BILLED

TOTAL 

COMPENSATION

Partners and Counsel 767 128.7 $98,700

Associates 400 142.3 $56,920

Blended Attorney Rate 574 271 $155,620

Paraprofessionals and other non-legal staff 150 20 $3,000

Total Fees Incurred 545 291 $158,620

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4579-1 Filed: 11/05/19 Entered: 11/05/19 14:28:11 Page 2

of 2
No. 17,836.

#### Square Deal Implement Co. *v.*Robert D. Moffitt.

(303 P. [2d] 685)

Decided November 19, 1956.

Mr. Isaac Mellmán, Mr. Gerald N. Mellman, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Houtchens and Houtchens, Mr. Paul E. Garrison, for defendant in error.

*En Banc.*

Per Curiam.

Judgment affirmed without written opinion.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION

-andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

Debtors.

Case No, 19-30088 (DM)

Chapter 11

(Lead Case)

(Jointly Administered)

TRANSFER OF CLAIM OTHER THAN FOR SECURITY

A CLAIM HAS BEEN FILED IN THIS CASE or deemed filed under 11 U.S.C. §1111 (a). Transferee hereby gives notice 

pursuant to Rule 3001(e) (2), Fed. R. Bankr. P., of the transfer, other than for security, of the claim referenced in this notice.

CONTRARIAN FUNDS, LLC

Name of Transferee

Address for all Communications/Notices:

CONTRARIAN FUNDS, LLC

411 WEST PUTNAM AVE., SUITE 425

GREENWICH, CT 06830

ATTN: ALISA MUMOLA

Phone: 203-862-8211

Fax: 203-485-5910

Email: tradeclaimsgroup@contrariancapital.com

Address for all Payments/Distributions:

CONTRARIAN FUNDS, LLC

ATTN: 392426

500 ROSS ST 154-0455

PITTSBURGH, PA 15262

ENERGY LINK INDUSTRIAL SERVICES INC

Name of Transferor

Name and Current Address of Transferor:

ENERGY LINK INDUSTRIAL SERVICES INC 

ATTN: RAY MILLER

11439 S ENOS LN

BAKERSFIELD, CA 93311 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this notice

is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

By:_______/s/ Alisa Mumola_________

 Transferee/Transferee’s Agent

Date: October 22, 2019

Penalty for making a false statement: Fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for up to 5 years, or both. 18 U.S.C. §§ 152 & 3571.

Schedule/Claim No. Creditor Name Amount Debtor Case No.

Schedule F Energy Link Industrial 

Services, Inc.

$146,028.00 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 19-30089

Claim No. 2594 Energy Link Industrial 

Services, Inc.

$146,028.00 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 19-30089

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4372 Filed: 10/22/19 Entered: 10/22/19 07:16:55 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4372 Filed: 10/22/19 Entered: 10/22/19 07:16:55 Page 2 of

2
**Exhibit31.2**

 

**Certificationof the Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuantto**

**Rules13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) under the Exchange Act**

 

I,Randall J. Frapart, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form10-Q of HyperFeed Technologies, Inc.;

 

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

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.             The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a)           designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiary,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

 

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

 

(c)           disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a)           all significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b)           any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date:November 9, 2004

 

 
|   | /s/  Randall J. Frapart  |   |
|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   | Randall  J. Frapart      |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----
Exhibit 32

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION



The undersigned each certify that:

1. They are the duly appointed Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, respectively, of Northern Empire Bancshares, a California
Corporation ("the Company"); and

2. To their best knowledge and belief, the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, and to which the
Certification is attached as Exhibit 32, fully complies with the
requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of Northern Empire Bancshares.



Date:     May 9, 2006

     /s/ Deborah A. Meekins             /s/ Larry V. Sorensen
     ----------------------             ----------------------
     Deborah A. Meekins                 Larry V. Sorensen
     President and                      Chief Financial Officer
     Chief Executive Officer
#### William J. Smith, Respondent, v. William A. Seguine, Appellant, Impleaded with John Seguine, Defendant.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion.

Present — Jenks, P. J., Hirschberg, Burr, Woodward and Rich, JJ.
#### Barbara Sullivan, Respondent *v.*Eugene Wager, Appellant, Impleaded with Max Fialkoff, Defendant.* John Sullivan, Respondent, *v.*Eugene Wager, Appellant, Impleaded with Max Fialkoff, Defendant.†

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

June 22, 1931.

*Smith & Bowman,*for the appellant.

*Hallinan & Groh,*for the respondents.

*

Affg. 139 Misc. 855.

†

 Revg. 139 Misc. 855.

Per Curiam.

On the facts presented the denial of the motion for a separate bill of costs in the action brought by the infant plaintiff does not appear to have been an abuse of discretion on the part of the court below. In view of the amount of the recovery in the father’s action, however, section 1476 of the Civil Practice Act was not applicable *(Haniford*v. *Safer,*214 App. Div. 435), and the appellant was, therefore, entitled to a bill of costs in his favor in that action.

Order in the infant’s action affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Order in the father’s action reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted.

All concur. Present — Levy, Callahan and Untermyer, JJ.
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Margolis, 124 Ohio St.3d 1220, 2010-Ohio-1049.]

DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. MARGOLIS. 

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Margolis, 

 124 Ohio St.3d 1220, 2010-Ohio-1049.] 

(No. 2006-2331 — Submitted February 25, 2010 — Decided March 4, 2010.) 

ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. 

__________________ 

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an 

application for reinstatement by respondent, Loren Jonathan Margolis, Attorney 

Registration No.0007957, last known business address in Cleveland, Ohio. 

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of July 18, 2007, 

wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a 

period of two years, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that 

order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore, 

{¶ 3} It is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the 

practice of law in the state of Ohio. 

{¶ 4} It is further ordered that the Clerk of this court issue certified 

copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be 

made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the 

costs of publication. 

{¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Margolis, 114 Ohio 

St.3d 165, 2007-Ohio-3607, 870 N.E.2d 1158. 

 MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR,

O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 

______________________