alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Dann, 136 Ohio St.3d 1203, 2013-Ohio-2411.] 

DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. DANN. 

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Dann, 136 Ohio St.3d 1203, 2013-Ohio-2411.] 

(No. 2011-2026—Submitted June 7, 2013—Decided June 11, 2013.) 

ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. 

____________________ 

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

application for reinstatement by respondent, Marc Edward Dann, Attorney 

Registration No. 0039425, last known business address in Cleveland, Ohio. 

{¶ 2} The court, coming now to consider its order of November 20, 

2012, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended 

respondent for a period of six months, finds that respondent has substantially 

complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). 

{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to 

the practice of law in the state of Ohio. 

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

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

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

publication. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY,

FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., concur. 

________________________
**EXHIBIT
      32**


**CERTIFICATION**


**OF**


**PRINCIPAL
      EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**AND**


**CHIEF
      FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




I,
      Regis
      Kwong, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
      Jingwei International Limited for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report
      on
      Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of Jingwei International Limited.




I,
      Helen
      Lu, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
      of
      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
      Jingwei International Limited for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report
      on
      Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of Jingwei International Limited.





By:
            /s/
                Regis KwongRegis
                KwongChief
                Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)By:
            /s/
                Helen LuHelen
                LuChief
                Financial Officer(Principal
                Financial and Accounting Officer)




May
      9,
      2008
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 96 (Thursday, May 16, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 24835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12297]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[NAFTA-00684]


Mead Office Products, Salem, Oregon; Dismissal of Application for 
Reconsideration

    Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(C) an application for administrative 
reconsideration was filed with the Program Manager of the Office of 
Trade Adjustment Assistance for workers at Mead Office Products, Salem, 
Oregon. The review indicated that the application contained no new 
substantial information which would bear importantly on the 
Department's determination. Therefore, dismissal of the application was 
issued.

NAFTA-00684; Mead Office Products, Salem, Oregon (April 26, 1996)

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 26th day of April, 1996.
Russell T. Kile,
Acting Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of 
Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 96-12297 Filed 5-15-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
H. Res. 483 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 29, 2009. 

Whereas veterans of the Spanish-American War and Philippine Insurrection, the Nation’s first major foreign conflicts, faced hardships to include a complete lack of medical care and pensions upon discharge from the service; 

Whereas, on September 29, 1899, the American Veterans of 

Foreign Service and in December 1899, the National Society of the Army of the Philippines, were established to 

advocate for the rights and benefits then denied to veterans of the Spanish-American War and Philippine Insurrection; 

Whereas, in subsequent years, membership in these and other 

veterans organizations continued to grow; 

Whereas these veterans organizations, recognizing their common goals and the importance of unity, merged to form 

the present-day Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United 

States in 1914; 

Whereas membership in the Veterans of Foreign Wars continued to grow and reached nearly 200,000 in 1936 when 

the organization received its Congressional Charter; 

Whereas the 2.3 million members of the Veterans of Foreign 

Wars and Ladies Auxiliary remain committed to the organization’s mission of ‘‘ensuring rights, remembering 
2 

•HRES 483 EH 

sacrifices, promoting patriotism, performing community 

services, and advocating for a strong national defense’’; 

Whereas the organization continues this honorable mission by 

effectively advocating for our Nation’s veterans, to include helping establish the present-day Department of 

Veterans Affairs, creating the Montgomery G.I. Bill, developing the national cemetery system, and assisting combat wounded veterans receive compensation for their injuries; and 

Whereas the members of the Veterans of Foreign Wars celebrate the organization’s establishment and achievements 

on September 29th while carrying on the vital mission of 

their predecessors: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

the goals and ideals of Veterans of Foreign Wars Day. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Tony NENNINGER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 18915.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two.

Feb. 15, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 16, 1994.

Application to Transfer Denied April 26, 1994.

Tony Nenninger, pro se.

No appearance for plaintiff-respondent.

PREWITT, Judge.

Defendant was charged with and convicted of parking a vehicle in an unauthorized area in a state forest contrary to § 252.045(2), RSMo 1986 (since amended, *See*RSMo Supp. 1993). Violation of § 252.045(2) is a misdemeanor punishable by up to three months in the county jail or a. fine of up to $500 or a combination. § 252.230 RSMo 1986. Defendant appeals.

Defendant presents two points relied on. Citations omitted, they state:

> I. The state has not met its burden of showing that the circumstantial evidence used to convict appellant is incapable of any other reasonable explanation except guilt.

> II. Appellant was never advised of the consequences of representing himself in a criminal matter and therefore did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive any right to counsel.

These points do not comply with the requirements of Rule 30.06(d). The requirements for a point relied on in an appellate brief are the same in a criminal case under Rule 30.06(d) as for a civil case under Rule 84.04(d). *State v. Vivone,*857 S.W.2d 489, 497 n. 5 (Mo.App.1993). Three things are required with respect to points relied on under that rule: (1) a statement of the action or ruling complained of; (2) why the ruling was erroneous; and (3) wherein the evidence, the lack of it, or other matters support the position the party asserts the trial court should have taken. *Carrier v. City of Springfield,*852 S.W.2d 196, 198 (Mo.App. 1993).

By not substantially complying with Rule 30.06 defendant preserves nothing for appellate review. *State v. Vivone,*supra at 498; *State v. Higgins,*852 S.W.2d 172, 175 (Mo.App.1993). An insufficient “point relied on” preserves nothing for this court’s review. *State v. Flemming,*855 S.W.2d 517, 520 (Mo. *590App.1993); *State v. Keith,*811 S.W.2d 70, 71 (Mo.App.1991).

Although defendant is proceeding pro se, that does not change the result. A pro se defendant is bound by the same rules of procedure as an attorney. *State v. Vandeventer,*746 S.W.2d 658, 660 (Mo.App.1988). The points here do not set forth what ruling of the trial court is complained of and at least Point I fails to show “wherein” there was trial error. The points here do not preserve anything for this court to review.

The judgment is affirmed.

CROW and GARRISON, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATIONS 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 report of Ridgewood Energy O Fund, LLC (the Fund) on Form 10-Q for
the period ended June 30, 2008 as furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned 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 the best of their 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 operations of the Fund.

|                      |  |     |        |  |                                                       
|--------------------- |  | --- | ------ |  | ------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: August 1, 2008 |  |     |        |  | RIDGEWOOD
  ENERGY O FUND, LLC                        
|                      |  |     |        |  |                                                       
|                      |  | By: | /s/    |  | ROBERT E. SWANSON                                     
|                      |  |     |        |  |                                                       
|                      |  |     | Name:  |  | Robert E.
  Swanson                                   
|                      |  |     | Title: |  | President
  and Chief Executive Officer               
|                      |  |     |        |  | (Principal
  Executive Officer)                       
|                     
|Dated: August 1, 2008 |  |     |        |  |                                                       
|                      |  | By: | /s/    |  | KATHLEEN P.
  McSHERRY                                
|                      |  |     |        |  |                                                       
|                      |  |     | Name:  |  | Kathleen P.
  McSherry                                
|                      |  |     | Title: |  | Executive
  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                      |  |     |        |  | (Principal
  Financial and Accounting Officer)        

A signed original of this
written statement or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise
adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement has been provided to Ridgewood Energy O Fund, LLC and
will be retained by Ridgewood Energy O Fund, LLC and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 3556

_____________________________
B OBBY J OE D AVIS , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County

. Michael C. Overstreet , Judge

. February 25, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
B ILBREY , W INOKUR , and J AY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.3 31

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Carrie McMullen, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody , Attorney General, Anne C. Conley and Amanda Stokes, Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee
, fo r Appellee.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 96 (Thursday, May 16, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 24793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12349]



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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5504-5]


Notice of Proposed Assessment of Clean Water Act Class II 
Administrative Penalty to Ameron, Inc. and Opportunity to Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposal of a Clean Water Act Class II administrative penalty 
and notice of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1319(g), EPA is authorized to issue 
orders assessing civil penalties for various violations of the Act. EPA 
may issue such orders after the commencement of either a Class I or 
Class II penalty proceeding. EPA provides public notice of the proposed 
assessment pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1319(g)(4)(a).
    Class II proceedings are conducted under EPA's Consolidated Rules 
of Practice Governing the Administrative Assessment of Civil Penalties 
and the Revocation and Suspension of Permits, 40 CFR part 22. The 
procedures through which the public may submit written comment on a 
proposed Class II order or participate in a Class II proceeding, and 
the procedures by which a Respondent may request a hearing, are set 
forth in the Consolidated Rules. The deadline for submitting public 
comment on a proposed Class II order is thirty days after publication 
of this notice.
    On the date identified below, EPA commenced the following Class II 
proceeding for the assessment of penalties:
    In the Matter of Ameron, Inc. (Concrete Pipe Manufacturing 
Facility) Phoenix, AZ 85036, Docket No. CWA-IX-FY95-17; filed on May 1, 
1996 with Steven Armsey, Regional Hearing Clerk, U.S. EPA, Region 9, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105, (415) 744-1389; 
proposed penalty of $30,000, for discharges of pollutants in violation 
of an NPDES permit.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Persons wishing to receive a copy of 
EPA's Consolidated Rules, review the complaint or other documents filed 
in this proceeding, comment upon a proposed assessment, or otherwise 
participate in the proceeding should contact the Regional Hearing Clerk 
identified above. The administrative record for this proceeding is 
located in the EPA Regional Office identified above, and the file will 
be open for public inspection during normal business hours. All 
information submitted by the respondent is available as part of the 
administrative record, subject to provisions of law restricting public 
disclosure of confidential information.

    Dated: April 25, 1996.
Ken Greenberg,
Acting Director, Water Management Division.
[FR Doc. 96-12349 Filed 5-15-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
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 

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

La Parker Everett, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Paul Penzone, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-17-4453-PHX-JAT (DMF)

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, currently an inmate at Arizona State Prison Complex-Lewis, filed a pro se

Prisoner Civil Rights First Amended Complaint on April 27, 2018 (Doc. 11). On July 31, 

2018, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a Notice of Substitution within 120 days 

substituting the actual names of Defendants Medical Providers (Doc. 14 at 10). Plaintiff 

was warned that “if he fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including 

these warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice” (Id.). The Court 

later extended the time for Plaintiff to file his Notice of Substitution several times (Docs. 

18, 22, 26). The extended deadline ended on February 28, 2019. As of this date, Plaintiff 

has not filed his Notice of Substitution substituting the actual names of Defendants Medical 

Providers. The Court has given Plaintiff sufficient opportunity to discover the names and 

he has failed to timely do so. 

 The Court also warned Plaintiff that if he failed to timely obtain a waiver of service 

of the summons or complete service of the Summons and First Amended Complaint on a 

Defendant, the action may be dismissed as to each Defendant not served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 
- 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 

4(m); LRCiv 16.2(b)(2)(B)(ii) (Doc. 14 at 10). The service packet was returned 

unexecuted as to Defendant E-3773 (Doc. 20, November 20, 2018). The Court has given 

Plaintiff sufficient opportunity to discover the name of Defendant E-3773 and serve 

Defendant E-3773. Defendant E-3773 has not been served, the time to do so has expired 

(see Docs. 14, 26). 

Accordingly, 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED dismissing without prejudice the claims as to 

Defendants Medical Providers (including Defendant John Doe Doctor Provider) and 

Defendant John Doe Sheriff Detention Officer, #E-3773. Because these are the last 

remaining Defendants in this case, the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. 

 Dated this 9th day of April, 2019.
#### Frank M. PARRATT and Cindy Parratt, Respondents, v. SWEEPSTER JENKINS EQUIPMENT CO., d/b/a/ Jenkins Equipment Co., Inc., Appellant.

No. WD 49012.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Nov. 29, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Jan. 31, 1995.

Application to Transfer Denied March 21, 1995.

*647Donald W. Vasos, Kansas City, for appellant.

Robert E. Gould, Kansas City, for respondents.

Before ELLIS, P.J., and BERREY and SMART, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from judgment entered on jury verdict for the Parratts in product liability action.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 423 

Expressing support for a national day of remembrance for the workers of 

the nuclear weapons program of the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2009 

Mr. WAMP submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for a national day of remembrance for 

the workers of the nuclear weapons program of the 

United States. 

Whereas hundreds of thousands of men and women have 

served the United States in building its nuclear defense 

since World War II; 

Whereas these dedicated American workers paid a high price 

for their service and many have developed disabling or 

fatal illnesses as a result of exposure to beryllium, ionizing radiation, toxic substances, and other hazards that 

are unique to the production and testing of nuclear weapons; 

Whereas these workers were unintentionally put at individual 

risk without their knowledge and consent in order to deVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:41 May 08, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR423.IH HR423

jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 423 IH 

velop a nuclear weapons program for the benefit of all 

American citizens; 

Whereas these patriotic men and women deserve to be recognized for their contribution, service, and sacrifice towards 

the defense of our great Nation; and 

Whereas October 30, 2009, is the ninth anniversary of the 

enactment of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Act (title XXXVI of Public Law 106–398; 

42 U.S.C. 7384 note): Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideals of a day of re3 membrance for the workers of the nuclear weapons 

4 program of the United States, including uranium 

5 miners, millers, and haulers; and 

6 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

7 to recognize such a day of remembrance as an op8 portunity to support and participate in appropriate 

9 ceremonies, programs, and other activities in honor 

10 of the past and present workers of the nuclear weap11 ons program of the United States. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 101 (Thursday, May 23, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25858]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12903]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP96-238-000]


Texas Gas Transmission Corporation; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

May 17, 1996.
    Take notice that on May 15, 1996, Texas Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Gas) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, the tariff sheets listed on Appendix A attached to the filing 
and requests the tariff sheets to be effective June 15, 1996.
    Texas Gas states that this filing is being made to clean up Texas 
Gas's FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, to reflect various 
revisions that include: policies established by Order No. 582; 
correction of typographical errors and housekeeping items; updates 
since the initial issuance of Volume No. 1, and clarifications or minor 
changes specifying the company's current practices which have developed 
since the implementation of Order No. 636 in November, 1993.
    Texas Gas states that copies of the filing have been served upon 
Texas Gas's jurisdictional customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.211 and 385.214 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party to the proceeding must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-12903 Filed 5-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M