alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KATHARINA N. BLANCATO,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL

REVENUE,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Nos. 14-70654, 14-70655

Tax Ct. No. 8754-07

Tax Ct. No. 13019-08

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from Decisions of the

United States Tax Court

Submitted May 24, 2016** 

Before: REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. 

In these consolidated appeals, Katharina N. Blancato appeals pro se from the

Tax Court’s orders dismissing for failure to prosecute her petitions challenging the

Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s determinations of tax deficiencies for tax

years 2003 and 2004. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We

FILED

JUN 02 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes these cases are suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
review for an abuse of discretion. Noli v. Comm’r, 860 F.2d 1521, 1527 (9th Cir.

1988). We affirm.

The Tax Court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Blancato’s petitions

for failure to prosecute because Blancato failed to appear at trial and was otherwise

uncooperative. See id. at 1527 (noting that “dismissal for failure properly to

prosecute will normally arise where a party fails to appear at trial”); see also T.C.

R. 123(b) (Tax Court may dismiss a case and enter a decision against a petitioner

where the petitioner fails properly to prosecute or fails to proceed as required by

the Tax Court). 

Contrary to Blancato’s contention, the Tax Court did not err in lifting the

automatic stay after the Bankruptcy Court entered an order approving a stipulated

settlement that terminated the stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) as to Blancato. See id.

at 1525 (discussing an automatic stay under § 362 and explaining that “the terms of

an order lifting the automatic stay are strictly construed”). We reject Blancato’s

contention that the Tax Court should have sought leave from the Bankruptcy Court

to resume proceedings.

We treat Blancato’s reply briefs as both requesting leave to file multiple

briefs and to file the briefs late, and grant the requests. The Clerk shall file the

reply briefs submitted on July 28, 2014 and August 14, 2014. 

2 14-70655
We reject as without merit Blancato’s contention in her reply briefs that the

Commissioner’s answering brief should be rejected as untimely.

AFFIRMED.

3 14-70655
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Farrah Donald, Appellant.

[773 NYS2d 659]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (John J. Ark, J.), rendered August 17, 1999. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: By failing to move to withdraw the plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered because Supreme Court failed to advise him that he would be subject to a period of postrelease supervision *(see People v Hollenbach,*307 AD2d 776 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 642 [2003]). We decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice *(see People v Crump,*302 AD2d 901 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 537 [2003]). Present—Green, J.P., Pine, Scudder, Gorski and Hayes, JJ.
CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT 

ELIZABETH A. BRO 

BY: 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, A 

NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY 

COMPANY, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

SELENE FINANCE, L.P., A LIMITED 

PARTNERSHIP, 

Res • ondent. 

No. 83639 

FILED 

MAR 2 5 2022 

EUZABETH A. BROWN 

CLERK OF SliPREME COURT 

BY 

DEPUTYCITETRKl 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, and cause appearing, 

this appeal is dismissed. The parties shall bear their own costs and attorney 

fees. NRAP 42(b). 

It is so ORDERED. 

cc: Hon. David M. Jones, District Judge 

Janet Trost, Settlement Judge 

Hanks Law Group 

Wright, Finlay & Zak, LLP/Las Vegas 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

CLERK'S ORDER 

ill) 1947 ,431Pr,
Exhibit 32.2



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 this Quarterly Report of Fresh Promise Foods, Inc. (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,
2016, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I Joe E. Poe, Jr, 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) | Such
    Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2016, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2016, fairly presents, in all material
    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|Dated: April 27, 2018 | FRESH PROMISE FOODS, INC.
|--------------------- | -------------------------
|                      | (Registrant)             
|                      |                          
|                      | /s/
    Joe E. Poe, Jr.  
|                      | Joe E. Poe, Jr.          
|                      | Chief Executive Officer  



|
|
|
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          1,070
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  51,304
<ALLOWANCES>                                    2,339
<INVENTORY>                                    27,503
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               85,335
<PP&E>                                        226,798
<DEPRECIATION>                                106,266
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                383,471
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          63,605
<BONDS>                                       261,621
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          18,088
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                     41,722
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  383,471
<SALES>                                        75,694
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               75,694
<CGS>                                          55,969
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  55,969
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               15,933
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  214
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              6,278
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (2,453)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (701)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (1,752)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (1,752)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0




</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 14, 2014 

# Order

October 14, 2014

149955 ( 58 )

JEFFREY CULLUM

, Plaintiff

- Appell ee

,

v

FREDERICK LOPATIN, D.O.

, Defendant

- Appell ant

, and

DEARBORN EAR, NOSE AND THROAT

CLINIC P.C.,

Defendant

. SC: 149955

COA: 313739

Wayne CC: 10

- 007013

- NH

________ ______________________________ /

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the defendant

- appellant to extend the

time for filing hi s reply brief in this application for leave to appeal is GRANTED. The

reply brief will be accepted as timely filed if filed on or before October 20, 2014.
Attachment C: USSOUTHCOM Medical Waiver Process (2022-2024)

Local medical personnel ensure all supporting documents, 

specialty consultations and justifications are included in the 

medical waiver request form (Attachment A).

Local medical screening personnel determine if individual 

entering the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility (AOR) is 

found to be NON DEPLOYABLE as per SC Reg 40-501.

Local medical personnel will forward a completed waiver 

request form (Attachment A) and supporting documents to the 

appropriate component surgeon (see following page for contact 

information) IAW SC Reg 40-501, Appendix B , Paragraph 

3.C.

Local medical personnel notify individual of 

NON DEPLOYABLE 

status and give medical 

disposition instructions. 

Individual completes 

needed medical workup 

and is found DEPLOYABLE. 

Local medical personnel notify the individual’s supervisor 

of NON DEPLOYABLE status. Supervisor enforces compliance with medical disposition and awaits workup results if 

applicable. 

Component SG reviews, adjudicates YES or NO and forwards medical waiver to local medical personnel and 

SOUTHCOM SG within 15 business days of receipt. 

Component SG Adjudicates: 

YES (DEPLOYBALE)

Component SG Adjudicates:

NO (NON-DEPLOYABLE) 

Local medical personnel and individual’s supervisor assess 

if deployment is necessary and safe and decide to pursue a 

medical waiver. If pursued, medical waiver must be received 

60-90 days from deployment date.

Appeals will include an O-6 

CDR Memo accepting full 

responsibility of redeploying 

the individual for any nondeployable condition identified

Component SG Adjudicates: 

YES (DEPLOYABLE)

Component SG Adjudicates: 

(NO) NON DEPLOYABLE

1

2

3

4

5

6

Page 1 of 2
Attachment C: USSOUTHCOM Medical Waiver Process (2022-2024)

Waiver Authority Contact List

As of 21 FEB 2023

United States Government (USG) personnel (military, civilian and contractors) seeking to enter the 

USSOUTHCOM Area of Responsibility (AOR) must refer to SC Regulation 40-501 and respective 

attachments to determine if minimum medical entry requirements are met. If a medical waiver is 

needed, SC Regulation 40-501 will walk you through the process. Once the waiver packet is complete, please contact the appropriate USSOUTHCOM component surgeon below for adjudication.

For ARMY Personnel, contact

ARMY SOUTH Chief Clinical Operations, MAJ Chris Gonzalez

christopher.gonzalez2.mil@army.mil

For NAVY Personnel, contact

NAVY SOUTH Surgeon, CAPT Bradford L. Smith

bradford.l.smith10.mil@us.navy.mil 

For AIR FORCE Personnel, contact:

AIR FORCE SOUTH Surgeon 

12.AF.SG@us.af.mil

Once complete, please submit your waiver packet to the corresponding waiver authority above. 

Page 2 of 2

For MARINE Personnel, contact:

MARINE FORCES SOUTH Surgeon, CAPT Corry Kucik

corry.kucik.mil@usmc.mil
**EXHIBIT 31**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Andrew Wallace certify that:  

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB (“Report”) of Solar Energy Limited;  

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this Report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the period presented in this Report;   

 

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:  

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this Report is being prepared;   

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this Report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this Report based on such evaluation; and  

 

c) Disclosed in this Report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and  

 

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):   

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and   

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal controls over financial reporting. 

 

Date: December 18, 2007  

 

/s/ Andrew Wallace

Andrew Wallace

Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 64042]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30314]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP96-2-001]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

December 7, 1995.
    Take notice that on December 1, 1995, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern), tendered for filing to become part of Northerns FERC Gas 
Tariff Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet, proposed 
to be effective November 1, 1995.

    Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 211

    Northern states that this filing is being made to comply with the 
Commission's Letter Order issued October 30, 1995, in Docket No. RP96-
2-000.
    Northern states that Sheet No. 211 has been revised to retain the 
existing meter responsibility mechanism as the default mechanism, with 
additional language allowing for any other mutually agreed upon 
alternative.
    Northern also states that copies of the filing were served upon the 
companys customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C., 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. Pursuant to Section 154.210 of the 
Commission's Regulations, all such protests must be filed not later 
than 12 days after the date of the filing noted above. All protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken in this proceeding, but will not serve to make 
Protestant a party to the proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file 
with the Commission and are available for inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-30314 Filed 12-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 242 (Monday, December 18, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65051-65052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30640]



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

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION

[Docket No. RM95-4; Order No. 1094]

39 CFR Part 3001


Rules of Practice and Procedure

AGENCY: Postal Rate Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rulemaking; extension of time.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission is extending the time for the filing of 
comments on draft rules of practice and procedure published at 60 FR 
54981-89.

DATES: Comments on the draft rules of practice and procedure must be 
submitted on or before January 8, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments and correspondence should be sent to Margaret P. 
Crenshaw, Secretary of the Commission, 1333 H Street, N.W., Suite 300, 
Washington, D.C. 20268-0001 (telephone 202/789-6840).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen L. Sharfman, Legal Advisor, 
Postal Rate Commission, 1333 H Street, N.W., Suite 300, Washington, 
D.C. 20268-0001 (telephone 202/789-6820).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 27, 1995, Order No. 1084, a 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, was published at 60 FR 54981-89. This 
Notice presented draft rules that were founded on rules initially 
proposed by the United States Postal Service in a Petition filed April 
13, 1995. However, the Commission's draft rules incorporated views 
expressed and suggestions made in comments filed by twenty-one 
participants. The deadline established for comments on the Commission's 
draft rules was December 26, 1995. Notice is hereby given that the 
deadline for filing comments on the draft rules is extended to January 
8, 1996. 

[[Page 65052]]

    The Commission is concerned that the initial deadline for filing 
comments, December 26, 1995, falls at an inconvenient time, in the 
midst of the holiday season. As a courtesy to those planning to file 
comments on the draft rules and in the interest of obtaining comments 
based on a thorough review of the draft rules, the Commission has 
conferred this extension. It is Ordered:
    1. Comments addressing the draft rules published at 60 FR 54981-89 
are now due on January 8, 1996.
    2. The Secretary shall publish this Notice and Order in the Federal 
Register.

    Issued by the Commission on December 12, 1995.
Margaret P. Crenshaw,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-30640 Filed 12-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Kevin Wiemken v. Waller County, et al.

Appellate case number: 01-19-00628-CV

Trial court case number: 2019-03-8723

Trial court: 506th District Court of Waller County

The appellant, Kevin Wiemken, has filed a second motion for default judgment

against appellees, arguing appellees “did not answer in a timely manner” whether they have 

jurisdiction and “what species the appellee’s [sic] will take for payment for an [sic] alleged 

property taxes.” Appellant’s motion does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. Rule 10.1 requires a motion to, among other things, (a) “state with particularity 

the grounds on which it is based;” (b) “set forth the order or relief sought;” and (c) “in civil 

cases [such as this one], . . . contain or be accompanied by a certificate stating that the filing 

party conferred, or made a reasonable attempt to confer, with all other parties about the 

merits of the motion and whether those parties oppose the motion.” TEX.R. APP. P. 10.1(a).

Accordingly, the appellant’s motion for default judgment is denied.

Appellant is also notified that the deadline for filing the clerk’s record has passed.

The district clerk notified this Court on November 12, 2019, that a deposit was requested 

for preparation of the clerk’s record but appellant has not paid the deposit. Appellant must 

submit written evidence showing appellant has paid or made arrangements to pay the 

clerk’s fee for preparing the record within 10 days of the date of this order. If appellant 

does not submit proof of payment or arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the 

clerk’s record, we may dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: ___November 26, 2019___________________
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 235 (Thursday, December 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 62892]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29793]



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

NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES


National Endowment for the Arts; Challenge and Advancement 
Teleconference

    Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Pub. L. 92-463), as amended, notice is hereby given that a 
teleconference of the Challenge and Advancement Advisory Panel (Design 
Review Section) to the National Council on the Arts will occur from 1 
p.m. to 3 p.m. on December 12, 1995 at the Nancy Hanks Center, 1100 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20506.
    This meeting is for the purpose of application evaluation, under 
the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965, as 
amended, including discussion of information given in confidence to the 
Agency by grant applicants. In accordance with the determination of the 
Chairman on June 22, 1995 these sessions will be closed to the public 
pursuant to subsections (c) (4), (6) and 9(B) of section 552b of Title 
5, United States Code.
    Further information with reference to this meeting can be obtained 
from Ms. Yvonne Sabine, Committee Management Officer, National 
Endowment for the Arts, Washington, DC 20506, or call (202) 682-5433.

    Dated: December 1, 1995.
Yvonne M. Sabine,
Director, Council & Panel Operations, National Endowment for the Arts.
[FR Doc. 95-29793 Filed 12-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7537-01-M