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

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

July 23, 2008

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 07-14913

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 06-00238-CV-HLM-4

ALEA LONDON LIMITED, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

TONY F. COOK,

individually and d.b.a. T.F. Cook Construction, 

 Defendant-Third- 

 Party-Plaintiff- 

 Appellant,

JAMES MATTHEW HOOVER,

 Defendant-Appellant,

EMERGENCY WATER EXTRACTION SERVICE, LLC.,

d.b.a. EWES, et al.,

Defendants,

versus
2

SPENCER & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

 Third-Party-Defendant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

_________________________

(July 23, 2008)

Before TJOFLAT, DUBINA and BLACK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in

favor of Alea London Limited (“Alea”) in a declaratory judgment action. The

district court based it’s grant of summary judgment on the fact that the insured,

Tony F. Cook (“Cook”), on a commercial general liability policy issued by Alea,

failed to give notice to Alea of an accident, which was the basis for an underlying

action in Georgia state court as required by the insurance policy. The district court

further found that Cook had demonstrated no reasonable justification or excuse for

failing to provide notice. 

We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. Brooks v.

County Comm’n of Jefferson County, Ala., 446 F.3d 1160, 1161 (11th Cir. 2006). 
3

Summary judgment is warranted when there is no genuine dispute as to any

material fact. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). 

After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we agree with the

district court that Alea was entitled to summary judgment based on Cook’s failure

to comply with the policy’s notice requirements. 

AFFIRMED.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DIEMER & WEI, LLP

Kathryn S. Diemer (#133977)

100 West San Fernando Street, Suite 555

San Jose, CA 95113

Telephone: 408-971-6270 

Facsimile: 408-971-6271 

Email: kdiemer@diemerwei.com

-andWILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP

Matthew A. Feldman (pro hac vice)

Joseph G. Minias (pro hac vice)

787 Seventh Avenue

New York, NY 10019-6099

Telephone: (212) 728-8000

Facsimile: (212) 728-8111

Email: mfeldman@willkie.com

jminias@willkie.com

Counsel for Ad Hoc Group of Subrogation Claim Holders

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION,

-andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY, 

Debtors.

☐ Affects PG&E Corporation

☐ Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company

 Affects both Debtors

* All papers shall be filed in the lead case,

No. 19-30088 (DM)

Chapter 11 

Bankr. Case No. 19-30088 (DM)

(Jointly Administered)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3155 Filed: 07/23/19 Entered: 07/23/19 14:18:20 Page 1 of

2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

I, Alexander J. Lewicki, do declare and state as follows:

1. I am employed in Santa Clara County in the State of California. I am more than eighteen 

years old and not a party to this action. My business address is Diemer & Wei LLP, 100 

W. San Fernando St. Suite 555, San Jose, CA, 95113. 

2. I certify that on July 23, 2019, I caused a true and correct copy of each of the following 

documents to be served via First Class Mail to all parties listed in Exhibit A attached 

hereto: 

MOTION OF THE AD HOC GROUP OF SUBROGATION CLAIM HOLDERS TO 

TERINATE THE DEBTORS’ EXCLUSIVE PERIODS PURSUANT TO SECTION 

1121(d)(1) OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE

EXHIBIT A – RESTRUCTURING TERM SHEET

EXHIBIT B – PROPOSED ORDER

NOTICE OF HEARING ON MOTION OF THE AD HOC GROUP OF 

SUBROGATION CLAIM HOLDERS TO TERINATE THE DEBTORS’ 

EXCLUSIVE PERIODS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1121(d)(1) OF THE 

BANKRUPTCY CODE

3. I certify that on July 23, 2019, I caused a true and correct copy of each of the above listed 

documents to be served via Electronic Mail to all parties listed in Exhibit B attached 

hereto. 

4. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America, that 

the foregoing is true and correct and that if called upon as a witness, I could and would 

testify thereto.

Executed on July 23, 2019, 

/s/ Alexander J. Lewicki 

Alexander J. Lewicki 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3155 Filed: 07/23/19 Entered: 07/23/19 14:18:20 Page 2 of

2
Exhibit 32.1                                                      ALL-STATE PROPERTIES L.P. (A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP)   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 All-State Properties L.P., (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Garry McHenry, General Partner 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 Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  /s/ Garry McHenry ------------------------------ Garry McHenry General Partner May 20, 2008
Signed and Filed: February 8, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

February 08, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 386 Filed: 02/08/19 Entered: 02/08/19 14:06:43 Page 1 of 1
Form TRANSC

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

California Northern Bankruptcy Court

In re Debtor(s):

PG&E Corporation

Case No.: 19−30088 DM 11

Chapter: 11

NOTICE OF FILING OF TRANSCRIPT

AND DEADLINES RELATED TO RESTRICTION AND REDACTION

A transcript of the proceeding held on May 9, 2023 at 10:00 AM was filed on May 11, 2023. The following deadlines

apply:

The parties have until Thursday, May 18, 2023 to file with the court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this

transcript. The deadline for filing a request for redaction is Thursday, June 1, 2023.

If a request for redaction is filed, the redacted transcript is due Monday, June 12, 2023.

If no such notice is filed, the transcript may be made available for remote electronic access upon expiration of the

restriction period, which is Wednesday, August 9, 2023, unless extended by court order.

To review the transcript for redaction purposes, you may purchase a copy from the transcriber,

Jason Gottlieb

Attn: Jason Gottlieb, Dir. of Tran. Ops.

7227 N 16th St. #207

Phoenix, AZ 85020

or you may view the document at the clerk's office public terminal.

Dated: 5/15/23 For the Court:

Edward J. Emmons

Clerk of Court

United States Bankruptcy Court

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13722-1 Filed: 05/11/23 Entered: 05/11/23 04:50:01 Page 1

of 1
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





I,
Westley V. Thompson, principal executive officer of Sun Life Assurance Company
of Canada (U.S.) (the "Company"), hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge,
that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
September 30, 2009, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d))
and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.








/s/ Westley V.
      ThompsonWestley
      V. ThompsonPresident,
      SLF U.S.(principal
      executive officer)November
      12, 2009
#### Julia E. Blackman, Respondent, v. Eliza Wheeler, Appellant.

In the appeal submitted at this term orders are affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0004]
          - [FDA 225-09-0012]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

      ( print page 29562)    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is providing notice of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between FDA and Drugs.Com. The purpose of the MOU is to extend the reach of FDA Consumer Health Information and to provide consumers with better information and timely content concerning public health and safety topics, including alerts of emerging safety issues and product recalls. 

# DATES:

The agreement became effective May 26, 2010.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Jason Brodsky, Consumer Health Information Staff, Office of External Relations, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 5378, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-8234, e-mail:                         *Jason.Brodsky@fda.hhs.gov*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In accordance with 21 CFR 20.108(c), which states that all written agreements and MOUs between FDA and others shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    , the agency is publishing notice of this MOU.                

Dated: May 17, 2010.

Leslie Kux,

Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

      ( print page 29563)          ( print page 29564)          ( print page 29565)          ( print page 29566)    

[FR Doc. 2010-12638 Filed 5-25-10; 8:45 am]

                BILLING CODE 4160-01-S                      ( print page 29567)
#### STATE v. LESLIE ROUSE.

(Filed 5 October, 1927.)

Criminal Law — Verdict—Eleven Jurors — Consent — Judgment — Appeal and Error — Reversal—Constitutional Law.

While it may appear upon the face of the record in a criminal action on appeal to the Supreme Court that the defendant had agreed that the verdict of eleven jurors, one being excused for sickness, should be received as valid, the defendant may nevertheless insist that the verdict is invalid, and it appearing that it was not rendered by a.verdict of twelve men it will be declared invalid and a new trial ordered.

Appeal by defendant from *Sinclair, J.,*at May Term, 1927, of LeNoib.

New trial.

Indictment for a felony. From judgment upon a verdict of guilty, defendant appealed to the Supreme Court.

*Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Nash, for the State.*

*P. D. Groom, for defendant.*

CoNNOR, J.

The record in this ease contains an entry as follows: “While taking evidence, one of the jurors is taken very ill. By agreement of counsel for defendant, in the presence of defendant, and of the Solicitor for the State, the juror is excused. The case is concluded with eleven jurors.”

The contention made in the brief for defendant filed in this Court that “the record does not disclose that the defendant agreed to anything other than to excuse the juror,” is not supported by a fair interpretation of the record. It is manifest that defendant, upon advice of counsel, then appearing for him, agreed that the trial should proceed with eleven jurors, and that their verdict should be taken as the verdict of the jury. Otherwise, the learned judge, who presided at the trial, would have found the facts, ordered the juror withdrawn, and that a new trial be had.

The agreement, however, although entered upon the record in this case in the presence of and with the consent of defendant, upon the advice of counsel then appearing for him, does not, upon well settled principles, preclude defendant from assigning as error, upon his appeal to this Court, a judgment rendered upon the verdict of eleven jurors. The decisions of this Court in support of the assignment of error are unanimous. *S. v. Berry,*190 N. C., 363; *S. v. Hartsfield,*188 N. C., *319357; *S. v. Wheeler,*185 N. C., 670; *S. v. Pulliam,*184 N. C., 681; *S. v. Rogers,*162 N. C., 656; *S. v. Scruggs,*115 N. C., 805; *S. v. Holt,*90 N. C., 749; *S. v. Stewart,*89 N. C., 564.

The judgment haying been rendered upon a verdict of eleven jurors, as shown by the record, cannot be sustained. The verdict is a nullity. The defendant is entitled to a

New trial.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT HISR AEL RIVER

A OR T IZ, Pe titione r, v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 13-71620 Age n c y No. A088-514-112 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d

June 22, 2015 ** B e fore : HAW K INS, GR AB ER , a nd W . FLETC H ER , C irc uit Judge s . Hisra e l R ive ra Ortiz , a

native and c itiz e n of M e xic o, pe titions for re v ie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism i ssing his a p p e a l from

an im m igration judge ’ s de c i sion de ny i ng his a pplic at ion for withholding of re m ova l and prote c tion unde r the C onve ntion Aga inst Torture (“ C AT” ). W e hav e 

# FIL ED JUL 09 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for substa ntia l e vide n c e the a ge nc y ’ s fa c tua l findings. Silay a v . Muk a se y , 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th C ir. 2008). W e de ny the pe tition for re vie w . Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the B IA’ s de te rm ination tha

t R ive ra Ortizdid not e sta blish tha t he wa s or would bepe rse c ute d on a c c ount of a prote c te d ground. Se e P arussimova v . Muk

ase y , 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th C ir. 2009) (the REAL ID Ac t

“ re quire s tha

t a prote c te d ground re pre se nt ‘ one c e ntra l re a son’ for an a sy lum a pplic ant’ s pe rse c ution” ); Ze tino v . Holde r , 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th C ir. 2010) (“ [a ] n a lie n’ s de sire to be fre e from ha ra ssm e nt by

c rim ina ls m otiva

te d by the ft or random viole nc e by

ga ng m e m be rs be ars no ne xus to a prote c t e d ground” ). Thus, R ive ra Ortiz ’ s withholding of re m ova l c la im fa ils. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e a lso supports the B IA’ s de nia l of C AT re l ie f be c a use R ive ra Ortizfa ile d

to e sta b l ish it is m

ore like ly tha n not he would betorture d at the instiga tion of or with the

a c q u ie sc e nc e of the gove rnm e nt if re turne d to M e xic o. Se e S ilay a , 524 F.3d a

t 1073. Fina lly , we re

je c t R ive ra

Ortiz ’ s c onte ntions tha

t the B IA’ s a

n a l y s is of his c la im s wa s ina de quate and tha t the a ge nc y

fa ile d to c onside r a ll his c irc um sta nc e s. PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

1 3 - 7 1 6 2 0 2
#### Ida E. Parks, Respondent, v. Charles H. Ellsworth and another, Appellants.

Order reversed, without costs, with leave to the plaintiff to renew the motion.

Opinion by

Barker, J.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 1, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 30481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12819]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision

[AC-42: OTS No. H-4706]


Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc., Jacksonville, IL; Approval of 
Conversion Application

    Notice is hereby given that on May 14, 2010, the Office of Thrift 
Supervision approved the application of Jacksonville Bancorp, MHC, and 
Jacksonville Savings Bank, Jacksonville, Illinois, to convert to the 
stock form of organization. Copies of the application are available for 
inspection by appointment (phone number: 202-906-5922 or e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3b6b4e595752581572555d547b746f68156f495e5a48155c544d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c191b4a3ada8a2ef88afa7ae818e9592ef95b3a4a0b2efa6aeb7">[email protected]</span></a>) at the Public Reading Room, 1700 G Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20552, and the OTS Central Regional Office, 1 South 
Wacker Drive, Suite 2000, Chicago, Illinois 60606.

    Dated: May 21, 2010.

    By the Office of Thrift Supervision.
Sandra E. Evans,
Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2010-12819 Filed 5-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**Certification of the Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to**

**Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) under the Exchange Act**

 

 

I, Randall J. Frapart, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of HyperFeed Technologies, Inc.;

 

2.             Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.             The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)           designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

(b)           evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)           disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

 

(a)           all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

(b)           any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date:  May 6, 2004

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

 

1

----
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 of ICOA, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 operation of the Company.

Date November 11, 2005                       By:        /s/ Richard Schiffmann
                                                        -----------------------
                                             Name:      Richard Schiffmann
                                             Title:     Chief Executive Officer





         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authentications, 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 Sherb & Co., LP and
will be retained by ICOA, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 10(a)

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 115 to Registration Statement No. 33-26305 on Form N-1A of our report dated May 20, 2009, relating to the financial statements and financial highlights of BlackRock
FundsSM, including BlackRock Money Market Portfolio, BlackRock U.S. Treasury Money Market Portfolio, BlackRock Municipal Money Market Portfolio, BlackRock New Jersey Municipal Money Market Portfolio, BlackRock North Carolina Municipal
Money Market Portfolio, Blackrock Ohio Municipal Money Market Portfolio, BlackRock Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market Portfolio and BlackRock Virginia Municipal Money Market Portfolio, appearing in the Annual Report on Form N-CSR of BlackRock
FundsSM, for the period ended March 31, 2009, and to the references to us under the headings “Financial Highlights” in the Prospectuses and “Independent Registered Public Accountant” and “Financial
Statements” in the Statement of Additional Information, all of which are part of such Registration Statement.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

  

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

July 27, 2009
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 3660    Filed: 08/22/19    Entered: 08/22/19 13:34:26    Page 1 of2

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 3660    Filed: 08/22/19    Entered: 08/22/19 13:34:26    Page 2 of2