alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Filed 7/24/13 P. v. Cruz CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. DAVID ALEXANDER CRUZ, Defendant and Appellant. F065147 (Super. Ct. No. 12CM0180)


### OPINION

THE COURT * APPEAL from a judgment of the Superi or Court of Kings C ounty. Steven D. Barnes, Judge. Richard Moller, under appointment by th e Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

- ooOoo

-

* Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J., and Peña, J.2 Defendant and appellant Da vid Alexander Cruz appeals from a judgment entered on June 11, 2012. We affirm the judgment. Facts and Procedural History About 2:00 a.m. on January 20, 2012, a police officer saw defendant’s truck
weave off the road an d then turn the wrong way onto a freeway. The officer made a traffic stop and determined that defendant was intoxicated. A subsequent inventory search of the truck disclosed two baggies of marijuana and a digital scale in a duffel bag
behind the driver’s seat. De fendant’s blood sample taken at the jail disclosed a blood
alcohol level of .17. After defendant’s motion to suppress ev idence and his motion for new counsel (see People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118) were denied, defendant admitted one count of violation of Health and Safety Code section 11360, subdivision (a), possession of marijuana for sale, and one count of violatio n of Vehicle Code section 23152, subdivision (b), driving with .08 percent or more of blo od alcohol, a misdemeanor, as part of a plea bargain that provided for probation. Other charges were dismissed pursuant to the plea agreement. Defendant was plac ed on probation, on the cond ition, among others, that he obey all laws and participate in a drug cour t program. Almost immediately, defendant tested positive for use of mar ijuana and informed the drug c ourt he could not afford to comply with the requirements of the program. In a further plea bargain, defendant admitted he violated probation and received a sentence of two years on the felony offense, to be served in local custody an d on mandatory supervised release pursuant to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (h), with a concurrent sentence on the misdemeanor
offense.
Discussion Appellant’s appointed appellate coun sel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that3 this court independently review the record. ( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Following independent review of the record , we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist. Disposition The judgment is affirmed.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16D0304. TREVOR MCGILL v. CAMIELLE BORUCKI.

Trevor McGill filed this application for discretionary appeal from the trial

court’s order denying his motion to change the last name of the parties’ minor child. 

The order was entered in a pending divorce case.1 We, however, lack jurisdiction.

The divorce case remains pending below as no final decree has been entered. 

Therefore, the order that McGill wishes to appeal is interlocutory in nature. See

Scruggs v. Ga. Dept. of Human Resources, 261 Ga. 587, 589 (1) (408 SE2d 103)

(1991). A party seeking appellate review from an interlocutory order must follow the

interlocutory application procedure set forth in OCGA § 5-6-34 (b), which includes

obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court and filing within ten

days of the order. See Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 833 (471 SE2d 213) (1996). 

OCGA § 5-6-35, which governs the discretionary appeal procedure, does not excuse

a party seeking appellate review of an interlocutory order from complying with the

additional requirements of OCGA § 5-6- 34 (b). See Bailey, supra. McGill’s failure

to follow the interlocutory appeal procedure deprives us of jurisdiction over this

application, which is therefore DISMISSED.

1 McGill filed his application in the Supreme Court of Georgia, which

transferred it to this Court.

April 11, 2016
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

04/11/2016
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1 D 2 0 2 3

- 2650

_____________________________ N.T.P.G., Mother of A.M.G., K.D.G., A.B.G., Jr., Minor Children

,
Appellant,

v.

D EPARTMENT OF C HILDREN AND F AMILIES ,
Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County

. Lacey Powell Clark , Judge

.

February 27, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.

D ISMISSED

. N.S.H. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fam. Servs. , 843 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 2003) ( approving procedure that includes dismissal when, after counsel withdraws, the appellant fails to timely file his or her own brief in support of appeal of termination of parental rights )

.

B ILBREY , T ANENBAUM , and L ONG , JJ., concur.2 _____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

N.T.P.G.

, pro se, Appellant.

Sarah J. Rumph, Children’s Legal Services, Tallahassee, for Appellee; Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Caitlin E. Burke, Senior Attorney, Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee, for Guardian ad Litem.
Medical benefits arrangement with James W. Young, Ph.D.



 Exhibit 10.65 
 Medical benefits arrangement with James W. Young, Ph.D. 
 In connection with the 2009 restructuring, James W. Young, Ph.D.
retired as Executive Chairman, effective as of April 3, 2009. In connection with his resignation as Executive Chairman, the Company agreed to cover Dr. Young’s medical benefits for a period of twelve months.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R ul e 36- 3. T he panel un ani m ou sl y f i nd s thi s c as e s ui t abl e f

or deci si on w i tho utoral ** ar gu m ent . F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NO T F ORP UB L I C AT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , ) N o. 10- 10094 ) P l ai nt i ff – A pp el l ee , ) D . C . N o. 4: 09 -c r- 00 36 6-C W -1 ) v . ) ME MORA ND UM * ) TERRY N O RRI S, ) ) D e f e n d a n t –A p p e llan t. ) ) )

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia C l audi aA . W i l ke n, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M ar c h 15, 2011 ** S a n F r an c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: W A L L A C E , F E RN A N D E Z , an dC L IF T O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. T erryN orri s app ea l s hi s c on vi ct i on for posse ss i ng a f i re arm i n furtherance o f ad ru g tr a f

f i c k i n g c r i me . Se e 1 8 U . S. C. § 9 2 4 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( A ) . W e a f f i rm. 

# FI LED MA R 24 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSS ee U ni t ed S t at es v. B ri gg s, 62 3 F . 3d 72 4, 72 7 (9th C i r. 20 10 ); U ni t ed 1 S ta te s v . O rte g a - A s c a n io , 3 7 6 F .3 d8 7 9 , 8 8 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . S e e F e d. R . C r i m . P . 11( d) ( 2) ( B ) ; B r i ggs , 623 F . 3d a t728; O rt e ga - A s c ani o, 2 3 7 6 F .3 da t 8 8 3 . S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. R oss, 51 1 F . 3d 12 33 , 12 36 –3 7 (9th C i r. 20 08 ); U ni t ed 3 S ta te s v . N o s tr a tis , 3 2 1 F .3 d1 2 0 6 , 1 2 1 0 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ; U n ite dS ta te s v . S ig n o r i, 844 F . 2d 635, 639 ( 9th C i r . 1988) ; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C a s t e l l o, 724 F . 2d 813, 815 (9th C i r. 19 84 ); se e a l so U ni t ed S t at es v. M ye rs , 99 3 F . 2d 71 3, 71 4– 15 (9th C i r. 19 93 ). 2 N o rr is ’ s o le c la im is th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e dw h e n it d e n ie dh is m o tio n to w i thdr a w hi s gui l typl e at o tha tc r i m e . H ow e ve r , w e ha ve r e vi e w e d the r e c or d a nd w e c anno tsay thatthe di stri ctcourtabused i t s di sc re t i on w hen i tdet erm i ned that 1 h is c la im o f

m e n ta l im p a irm e n t a t th e tim e o f th e p le ac o llo q u yd idn o t s p e ll o u t a f a i ra nd j us tr e a s on t o w i thdr a w the pl e a . H i s s t a t e m e nt s unde roa th a tthe t i m e of 2 the pl e aunde r c uthi s pr e s e ntc l a i m s of c l oude d unde r s t andi ng and m i sund er st andi ng , as do es the fa ctthathe had k no w n o f the fi ve-y ear m andat ory 3 m i ni m um se nt ence , w hi ch he agree d t o, for qui t e s om e t i m e bef ore he pl ed. U nd er the ci rc um st ance s, ac ce pt ance of N orri s’ cl ai m w ou l d l eave the re sul t s of pl ea he a r i ngs l i tt l e “ m or e tha n e phe m e r a l . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R i os - O rt i z , 830 F . 2d 1067, 10 70 (9th C i r. 19 87 ). AF F I R ME D.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                          824948
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   18938
<ALLOWANCES>                    8696
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                0
<PP&E>                          31973233
<DEPRECIATION>                  12049475
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  22500890
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           0
<BONDS>                         20563572
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        0
<OTHER-SE>                      0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    22500890
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                3700371
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   1640575
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                757269
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              1100972
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 0
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             201555
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    201555
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                   0
        



</TABLE>
Exhibit 13.1
  
  The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Cellcom Israel Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Report”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
  Nir Sztern, the Chief Executive Officer and Yaacov Heen, the Chief Financial Officer of Cellcom Israel Ltd., each certifies that:
  1.
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
  2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Cellcom Israel Ltd..
  Date: March 7, 2012
  /s/ Nir SzternName:  Nir SzternChief Executive Officer
 
 /s/ Yaacov HeenName:  Yaacov HeenChief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of the Judicial Settlement of the Intermediate Account of Joseph S. Rush, as Executor, etc., of Hannah Elizabeth Owens, Deceased, Appellant. Helena Hagler, Respondent.

Decree and order of the Surrogate’s Court of Kings' county affirmed, with costs. No opinión.

Jenks, P. J.-, Thomas, Carr, Woodward and Rich, JJ., concurred.
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 

WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 

Matthew A. Feldman (admitted pro hac vice) 

Joseph G. Minias (admitted pro hac vice) 

Charles D. Cording (pro hac vice pending) 

787 Seventh Avenue 

New York, NY 10019-6099 

Telephone: (212) 728-8000 

Facsimile: (212) 728-8111 

Email: mfeldman@willkie.com 

 jminias@willkie.com 

 ccording@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)

Case No. 19-30088 (DM) 

Chapter 11 

(Lead Case) 

(Jointly Administered) 

APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF 

ATTORNEY CHARLES D. CORDING 

PRO HAC VICE

Pursuant to B.L.R. 1001-2(a) and Civil L.R. 11-3, Charles D. Cording, an active member in 

good standing of the bar of New York, hereby applies for admission to practice in the Northern 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4676 Filed: 11/12/19 Entered: 11/12/19 13:43:57 Page 1 of

3
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

District of California on a pro hac vice basis representing the Ad Hoc Group of Subrogation Claim 

Holders in the above-entitled action. 

In support of this application, I certify on oath that: 

1. I am an active member in good standing of a United States Court or of the highest 

court of another State or the District of Columbia, as indicated above; 

2. I agree to abide by the Standards of Professional Conduct set forth in Local Rule 11-

4, and agree to become familiar with the Local Rules and the Bankruptcy Dispute 

Resolution Program of this Court; and, 

3. An attorney who is a member of the bar of this Court in good standing and who 

maintains an office within the State of California has been designated as co-counsel 

in the above-entitled action. The name, address and telephone number of that 

attorney is: 

Kathryn S. Diemer (#133977) 

DIEMER & WEI, LLP 

100 West San Fernando Street, Suite 555 

San Jose, CA 95113 

Telephone: 408-971-6270 

Facsimile: 408-971-6271 

Email: kdiemer@diemerwei.com 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Dated: November 12, 2019 

WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 

/s/ Charles D. Cording 

Charles D. Cording 

Counsel to Ad Hoc Group of Subrogation Claim Holders 

 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4676 Filed: 11/12/19 Entered: 11/12/19 13:43:57 Page 2 of

3
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4676 Filed: 11/12/19 Entered: 11/12/19 13:43:57 Page 3 of

3
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                            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 Advanced Accessory Systems, LLC (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Barry
G. Steele, 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/ Barry G. Steele


Barry G. Steele
Chief Financial Officer
August 5, 2002
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5420 

AN ACT 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permit 

the release of information regarding the status of certain 

investigations. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5420 EH

1 SECTION 1. RELEASE OF INFORMATION REGARDING THE 

2 STATUS OF CERTAIN INVESTIGATIONS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 6103(e) of the Internal 

4 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 

5 the following new paragraph: 

6 ‘‘(11) DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION REGARD7 ING STATUS OF INVESTIGATION OF VIOLATION OF

8 THIS SECTION.—In the case of a person who pro9 vides to the Secretary information indicating a viola10 tion of section 7213, 7213A, or 7214 with respect 

11 to any return or return information of such person, 

12 the Secretary may disclose to such person (or such 

13 person’s designee)— 

14 ‘‘(A) whether an investigation based on the 

15 person’s provision of such information has been 

16 initiated and whether it is open or closed, 

17 ‘‘(B) whether any such investigation sub18 stantiated such a violation by any individual, 

19 and 

20 ‘‘(C) whether any action has been taken 

21 with respect to such individual (including 

22 whether a referral has been made for prosecu23 tion of such individual).’’. 
3 

•HR 5420 EH

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

2 this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment 

3 of this Act. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 16, 

2014. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5420 

AN ACT 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 

status of certain investigations. permit the release of information regarding the
EXHIBIT B

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3499-2 Filed: 08/11/19 Entered: 08/11/19 23:06:09 Page 1

of 6
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3499-2 Filed: 08/11/19 Entered: 08/11/19 23:06:09 Page 2

of 6
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3499-2 Filed: 08/11/19 Entered: 08/11/19 23:06:09 Page 3

of 6
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3499-2 Filed: 08/11/19 Entered: 08/11/19 23:06:09 Page 4

of 6
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3499-2 Filed: 08/11/19 Entered: 08/11/19 23:06:09 Page 5

of 6
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3499-2 Filed: 08/11/19 Entered: 08/11/19 23:06:09 Page 6

of 6
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CertificationPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)**

 

 

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 oftitle 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned does hereby certifythat:

 

The Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,2006 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirementsof section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and information contained in the Form10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

 

 
|                    | /s/ David R.  Carlucci                |   |
|-------------------------|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Date:  May 5, 2006 | David R. Carlucci                     |
|                    | Chairman and  Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

 

 
|                    | /s/ Nancy E.  Cooper                                |   |
|-------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Date:  May 5, 2006 | Nancy E. Cooper                                     |
|                    | Senior Vice  President and  Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solelypursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United StatesCode) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as aseparate disclosure document.

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to IMS Health Incorporated and will be retained by IMS HealthIncorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

----
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 2059-4    Filed: 05/16/19    Entered: 05/16/19 16:56:13    Page 1of 2

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 2059-4    Filed: 05/16/19    Entered: 05/16/19 16:56:13    Page 2of 2
**Exhibit
        13.1**
  
    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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Cellcom Israel Ltd. (the
        “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
        Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Amos
        Shapira, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies, 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, as amended; and
  (2)
        The
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
   March
        12,
        2007
   /s/
                  Amos ShapiraAmos
                  Shapira
                Chief
                  Executive Officer
#### Ellen P. Mitchell, as Survivor of Benjamin B. Mitchell and Others, Appellant, v. Erwin J. Baldwin and Francis E. Baldwin, Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

AH'concurred, except Smith, P. J., not voting.
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

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP

767 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 10153-0119

Exhibit E

The Debtors are aware of the complexities of these cases, the many issues that need to be 

addressed, the various disciplines involved, and that staffing needs are dynamic based on a number of 

factors, many of which are unpredictable, including the activities of other parties in interest in the 

Chapter 11 Cases. Core teams of Business, Finance and Restructuring, Corporate, Tax, and Litigation 

attorneys were supplemented with additional resources as necessary to meet client needs under the 

changing circumstances of these Chapter 11 Cases. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2988-5 Filed: 07/15/19 Entered: 07/15/19 17:17:14 Page 1

of 1