alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
STELLA MAZUR, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-137 ) U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, ) not in its individual capacity but solely as ) trustee for the RMAC TRUST, SERIES ) 2016-CTT, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed May 8, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Jack R. St. Arnold, Judge. Mark P. Stopa of Stopa Law Firm, Tampa (withdrew after briefing), Latasha Scott of Lord Scott, PLLC, Tampa (withdrew after briefing), Richard J. Mockler of Stay In My Home, P.A., Saint Petersburg (withdrew after briefing), for Appellant. Stella Mazur, pro se. Richard S. McIver and H. Michael Muñiz of Kass Shuler, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.- 2 - Affirmed.
SALARIO and ATKINSON, JJ., and CASE, JAMES, ASSOCIATE JUDGE, Concur.
Exhibit 33.2
 MANAGEMENTS ASSERTION OF COMPLIANCE
 Company
  Platform i e
 Applicable Servicing Criteria
 Period
  
    
    The Companys management is responsible for assessing the Companys compliance with
the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
    
    The Companys management has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the
Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB.
    
    Based on such assessment, the Company has complied, in all material respects, with
the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
  CITIBANK, N.A.By:
    /s/ Karen MontbachKaren MontbachIts:
    Managing Director
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 240 (Thursday, December 14, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 64252]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30543]








FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, December 14, 1995.

PLACE: Room 600, 6th Floor, 1730 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the 
following:

    1. Energy West Mining Co., Docket No. WEST 93-169. (Issues 
include whether the judge correctly determined that the inspector 
did not abuse his discretion in issuing a failure to abate order.)
    Any person attending this meeting who requires special 
accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 
interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. 
Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(e).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: Jean Ellen (202) 653-5629/for toll free 
TDD Relay 1-800-877-8339.

    Dated: December 6, 1995.
Jean H. Ellen,

Chief Docket Clerk.

[FR Doc. 95-30543 Filed 12-12-95; 9:32 am]

BILLING CODE 6735-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 8, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 32293]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13615]



=======================================================================

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



DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS



38 CFR Part 21




Nonduplication; Pension, Compensation, and Dependency and 

Indemnity Compensation; Correction



AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.



ACTION: Correcting amendment.



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



SUMMARY: This document corrects the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 

regulation that governs nonduplication of the payment of benefits to 

the child of a veteran. This correction is required in order to amend a 

cross reference in the regulation. No substantive change to the content 

of the regulations is being made by this correcting amendment.



DATES: Effective Date: June 8, 2010.



FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracy Wang, Office of Regulation 

Policy and Management (02REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 

Vermont Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-4936.



SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VA published a final rule in the Federal 

Register on September 30, 1997, at 62 FR 51274, amending 38 CFR 3.503, 

by redesignating paragraphs (a) through (j) as paragraphs (a)(1) 

through (a)(10), respectively. Therefore, Sec.  3.503(h) became Sec.  

3.503(a)(8). However, VA neglected to amend the cross reference to 

Sec.  3.503(h) in 38 CFR 21.3023 to reflect this change. This document 

corrects this error by removing ``See Sec.  3.503(h)'' and adding the 

correct citation in its place, ``See Sec.  3.503(a)(8)''.



List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 21



    Administrative practice and procedure, Armed forces, Civil rights, 

Claims, Colleges and universities, Conflict of interests, Education, 

Employment, Grant programs--education, Grant programs--veterans, Health 

care, Loan programs--education, Loan programs--veterans, Manpower 

training programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools, 

Travel and transportation expenses, Veterans, Vocational education, 

Vocational rehabilitation.



William F. Russo,

Deputy Director, Regulation Policy and Management.



0

For the reasons set out in the preamble, VA is correcting 38 CFR Part 

21 as follows:



PART 21--VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EDUCATION



0

1. The authority citation for part 21, subpart C continues to read as 

follows:



    Authority:  38 U.S.C. 501(a), 512, 3500-3566, and as noted in 

specific sections.



Sec.  21.3023  [Corrected]



0

2. In the cross reference to Sec.  21.3023, remove ``See Sec.  

3.503(h)'' and add, in its place, ``See Sec.  3.503(a)(8)''.



[FR Doc. 2010-13615 Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
#### Otis C. Flick, Appellant, v. John Johnson and another, Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs — Opinion by

Dykman, J.
Project Category and Billing Category Hours

PG&E Corporation, et al. (Case No. 19-30088 (DM))

For the Period August 1, 2019 through August 31, 2019

Summary by Project Category and Billing Category

Total 

Compensation

Exhibit A

PwC LLP - Management, Tax and Advisory Consultants to the Debtors

Fixed Fee Services

Claims Services Retention Exhibit #: 01-B

Claims Coding 22.00 $3,417.00

Subtotal - Claims Services 22.00 $3,417.00

Subtotal - Hours and Compensation - Fixed Fee Services 22.00 $3,417.00

Hourly Services

Rate Case Support Services Retention Exhibit #: 01-L; SUPP 01-J

Rate Case Support Services 461.90 $118,839.00

Subtotal - Rate Case Support Services 461.90 $118,839.00

Wildfire Mitigation Plan Support Services Retention Exhibit #: SUPP 01-U

WMP Support Services 20.00 $6,707.50

Subtotal - Wildfire Mitigation Plan Support Services 20.00 $6,707.50

Subtotal - Hours and Compensation - Hourly Services 481.90 $125,546.50

Case Administration

Retention Exhibit #: CASE

3.90 $2,145.00

34.30 $12,430.00

Bankruptcy Requirements and Other Court Obligations

Employment Applications and Other Court Filings

Monthly, Interim and Final Fee Applications

Subtotal - Bankruptcy Requirements and Other Court Obligations 38.20 $14,575.00

Subtotal - Hours and Compensation - Case Administration 38.20 $14,575.00

Total - Hours and Compensation Sought for Reimbursement 542.10 $143,538.50

Monday, December 30, 2019

Page 1 of 1

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5229-1 Filed: 12/31/19 Entered: 12/31/19 09:45:02 Page 1

of 1
Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION I, Clifford S. Feibus, certify that:  1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the Corporate Backed Callable Trust Certificates, J.C. Penney Debenture-Backed Series 2007-1 Trust (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");  2.  Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4.  Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing, or similar, agreement in all material respects; and  5.  All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.  In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.  Date: March 28, 2019 By:  /s/ Clifford S. FeibusName:  Clifford S. Feibus Title: Senior Vice President and Controller (Senior Officer in charge of securitization of the Depositor)
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 135577 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 135577 COA: 280280 Muskegon CC: 98-041693-FH BOBBY HUNTER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 12, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

s0616 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 23, 2008

Clerk
P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711



# s> c© 

# f&J*

# J n houstow 

## }FFlCIAEi'8C?8l&9ESS co

Q.U. 

### PKOVATE USE



### RE: WR-82,802-01 .DEQUINNCY TYSON 

## 02 1R » ©@.4©8 0006557458 MAR 24 2015 MAILED FROM2IPCODE 78701
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BRADLEY DANE HACKENBERGER,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 280 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18th day of September, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
#### W. C. WEATHERMAN v. R. J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY.

(Filed 16 April, 1930.)

Negligence D c — Nonsuit is proper where evidence fails to show that plaintiff was injured by negligence of defendant.

An action to recover damages for a personal injury alleged to have been negligently inflicted will be nonsuited in the absence of evidence tending to show that the plaintiff was injured by the negligence of the defendant as alleged in the complaint. *Oweriby v. Power Co.,*194 N. C., 129, cited and applied.

Stacy, C. J., not sitting.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Schmck, J.,*at February Term, 1930, of Foesyth.

Affirmed.

*604This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, while he was at work as a carpenter in a building under construction by the defendant.

The action was tried in the Forsyth County Court. From judgment dismissing the action as upon nonsuit, at the close of the evidence, plaintiff appealed to the Superior Court of Forsyth County. His only assignment of error on said appeal, was based on his exception to the judgment of the County Court.

. From judgment of the Superior Court, overruling his assignment of error, and affirming the judgment of the. County Court, plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court.

*John D. Slawter and Parrish & Deal for plaintiff.*

*Manly, He¡ndren & Womble for defendant.*

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the Forsyth County Court, dismissing this action, at the close of the evidence, as upon nonsuit, is supported by the decision of this Court in *Owenby v. Power Co.,*194 N. C., 129, 138 S. E., 529. The evidence did not tend to show any facts upon which defendant could be held liable to plaintiff for damages resulting from his injuries. In the absence of evidence tending to show that plaintiff was injured by the negligence of defendant, as alleged in the complaint, the action was properly dismissed by the Forsyth County Court.

There is no error in the judgment of the Superior Court, affirming the judgment of the County Court. The judgment is

Affirmed.

Stacy, C. J., not sitting.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          24,517
<SECURITIES>                                    31,612
<RECEIVABLES>                                   82,325
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,238
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               138,622
<PP&E>                                         205,004
<DEPRECIATION>                                  19,430
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 368,291
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          148,280
<BONDS>                                        303,990
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                     (83,981)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   368,291
<SALES>                                        173,257
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               173,257
<CGS>                                          160,810
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  160,810
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,907
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (42,682)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,576
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (37,106)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (37,106)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Paul Bauer, Appellant.

Order remanding defendant, affirmed. Opinion by

Dykman, J.;

Pratt, J., not sitting.
exhibit_10-2.htm


    EXHIBIT
10.2

    


    


    AGREEMENT

    


    


    P.A.M.
agrees to pay Dan Cushman, $55,000 toward all associated costs of selling his
home in (address) and the move of household goods to the Tontitown, Arkansas
area. As a condition to this payment, Dan Cushman agrees not to terminate his
position as President of P.A.M. within 36 months of his start date with P.A.M.
or he will forfeit his entitlement to this payment. This forfeiture will not be
triggered by any termination caused by P.A.M., death, or disability. If the
payment is forfeited, Dan Cushman agrees to pay P.A.M. in cash within 90 days of
the termination.

    


    


    
      	
              By: /s/ Daniel H. Cushman

            	 
      	
              By: /s/ Peter J. Dwyer

            
	
              Daniel
      H. Cushman

            	 
      	
              Peter
      J. Dwyer

            


    

    


    


    NOTE:

    The
Company has also agreed to reimburse Mr. Cushman for up to eighteen (18) months
and up to $1,800 per month, for temporary living
expenses.
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 this annual report of ChromaDex Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for
the year ending January 3, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Frank L. Jaksch Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Thomas C. Varvaro, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the SarbanesOxley Act of 2002, that, to our 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 result of operations of the Company.

Date: April 3, 2009



/s/ FRANK L. JAKSCH JRFrank L. Jaksch Jr.Chief Executive Officer/s/ THOMAS C. VARVAROThomas C. VarvaroChief Fpinancial Officer
EXHIBIT 32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certifications





The undersigned officers certify that this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Advanced Battery Technologies, Inc.





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





February 2, 2011
/s/ Zhiguo FuZhiguo Fu (Chief Executive Officer)February 2, 2011
/s/ Guohua WanGuohua Wan (Chief Financial Officer)
**EXHIBIT 99.2**

 

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

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Northwest Airlines Corporation  (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Bernard L. Han, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 
| /s/ Bernard  L. Han      |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
|                     |   |
| Bernard L.  Han          |   |
| Chief  Financial Officer |   |
| November 6,  2002        |   |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 237 (Monday, December 11, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 63537]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30001]



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


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; 
Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of the rescheduling of the meeting of the Ad 
Hoc Clearinghouse Subcommittee of the National Deafness and Other 
Communication Disorders Advisory Council, the notice of which was 
published in the Federal Register 60 FR 55849 on November 3, 1995. This 
meeting could not be convened on November 16 due to the partial 
shutdown of the Federal Government. It is rescheduled for December 18 
from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., as a telephone conference call 
originating in room 3C05, Building 31, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, 
Maryland. The meeting will be open to the public, limited to space 
available.

    Dated: December 4, 1995.
Susan K. Feldman,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 95-30001 Filed 12-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### Davis S. WARD et al., Appellants, v. LOUISIANA WILD LIFE AND FISHERIES COMMISSION, Appellee.

No. 21275.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

June 8, 1965.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 8, 1965.

J. Mort Walker, Jr., of Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere & Denegre, New Orleans, La., for appellants.

Leo R. Wertheimer, George Stringer, Jr., New Orleans, La., Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen., Baton Rouge, La., Harry V. Booth, Shreveport, La., Morris Shapiro, Alexandria, La., Harry H. Howard, New Orleans, La., for appellee.

Before WOODBURY* and BELL, Circuit Judges, and HUNTER, District Judge.

*

**Senior Judge of the First Circuit, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

In an opinion1 stating the facts fully and correctly, the District Judge dismissed plaintiffs’ suit for failure to join indispensable parties and also for lack of jurisdiction. The District Judge was right, and for the reasons set out in his opinion, the judgment should be, and is hereby affirmed.

1

. Ward v. Louisiana Wild Life and Fisheries Commission, 224 F.Supp. 252 (1963).
DLD-077 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 18-3603

___________

IN RE: ANTHONY FLETCHER,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(Related to E.D. Pa. Civ. No. 2:10-cv-03188)

____________________________________

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

January 17, 2019

Before: JORDAN, GREENAWAY, JR. and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: January 25, 2019)

_________

OPINION*

_________

PER CURIAM

Pro se petitioner Anthony Fletcher seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the 

District Court to hold a hearing on a motion he filed regarding his appointed counsel in 

his underlying habeas proceedings in the District Court. Fletcher filed his mandamus 

petition in November 2018. By order entered December 3, 2018, the District Court 

 * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not 

constitute binding precedent.
2

denied his motion. In light of the District Court’s action, Fletcher’s request regarding his

now-resolved motion is moot.

To the extent that Fletcher vaguely seeks “reassignment in the alternative,” see

Mandamus Petition at ECF p. 3, he has not demonstrated his entitlement to the 

extraordinary remedy of mandamus relief. See Hollingsworth v. Perry, 558 U.S. 183, 

190 (2010) (per curiam) (“Before a writ of mandamus may issue, a party must establish 

that (1) no other adequate means [exist] to attain the relief he desires, (2) the party’s right 

to issuance of the writ is clear and indisputable, and (3) the writ is appropriate under the 

circumstances.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, we will dismiss

Fletcher’s petition.