alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Cruzan, Appellant, *v.*Cruzan.

Practice, *Supreme Court*— Equity—Findings *of fact*— Appeals.

1. The findings of fact of a judge which involve the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony will he given the effect of a verdict of a jury by the Supreme Court, where there is testimony to support them. Nothing but clear error will warrant the setting aside of findings of fact by a chancellor.

2. Where in a suit in equity for the dissolution of a partnership, the appointment of a receiver and for an accounting, a finding of the trial judge that the alleged partnership did not exist is sufficiently supported by testimony, a decree dismissing the bill will he affirmed.

Argued Oct. 20, 1913.

Appeal, No. 180, Oct. T., 1912, by plaintiff, from decree of O. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., July T., 1910, No. 1022, dismissing bill in equity for the dissolution of a partnership, in case of Samuel Cruzan v. Elmer E. Cruzan, Lou Stiltz, Mary B. Stewart and Haven Y. Wolf, Guardian Ad Litem of Lindle Olive Cruzan and Jean Cruzan, heirs at law of Gertrude M. Cruzan.

Before Pell, C. J., Mestbezat, Potteb, Stewabt and Moschziskeb, JJ.

Affirmed.

Bill in equity for the dissolution of a partnership, for the appointment of a receiver and for an accounting. Before Pbazeb, P. J.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Exceptions to the findings of fact and law of the trial *166judge were dismissed by tbe court and a decree was entered dismissing the bill. Plaintiff appealed.

*Errors assigned,*among others, was the decree of the court.

*William Strife McDowell,*with him *Patterson, Sterrett & Acheson,*for appellant.

*G. L. Kerr,*for appellee.

January 5, 1914:

Per Curiam,

The bill in this case was to have a partnership, alleged to exist between the plaintiff and one of the defendants, dissolved and a receiver appointed to wind up its affairs and for an accounting. The case was considered with care by the learned judge of the Common Pleas and the bill was dismissed on his finding that a partnership did not exist. Our examination of the testimony leáves no doubt of the correctness of the conclusion reached. But if a doubt existed it would not be ground for a reversal of the decree. Nothing but clear error will warrant the setting aside of findings of fact by a chancellor. What was said in the recent case of Eppsteiner v. Isman, 239 Pa. 393: “The findings of fact by a judge, which involve the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony, will be given the effect of a verdict of a jury and they will not be disturbed where there is testimony to support them” was á repetition of what before had been repeatedly said on the same subject.

The decree is affirmed at the cost of the appellant.
CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

The undersigned, being all the incorporators of American Career Centers,
Inc. (the "Corporation"), a corporation organized and existing under the
Nevada General Corporation Law, hereby certifies as follows:

1.  The original Articles of Incorporation for American Career Centers,
Inc. were filed with the Nevada Secretary of State on June 15, 1999.

2.         No payment for any shares of any class of stock has been
received by the Corporation as of the date of this amendment.

3.         The Corporation, by action of the undersigned incorporator
comprising all the incorporators, files this Certificate of Amendment to
change Article Eight to read as follows:

"ARTICLE EIGHT
DIRECTORS

"The number of directors which shall constitute the whole Board shall be
not fewer than one nor more than seven as shall be determined from time
to time pursuant to the by-laws of the Corporation.  The initial director
shall be William Anthony."

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 20th days
         of July, 1999.


/S/ JAMES M. CASSIDY
James M. Cassidy
Incorporator
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 accompanying Quarterly Report of Vanguard Natural Resources, LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott W. Smith, President and Chief Executive 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, as amended; and





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/s/ Scott W. SmithScott W. SmithPresident and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)



May 13, 2011
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

Gallagher &

Kennedy, P.A.

2575 East Camelback Road

Phoenix, Arizona 85016-9225

(602) 530-8000

Kenneth M. Motolenich-Salas (Bar No. 027499)

GALLAGHER & KENNEDY, P.A.

2575 East Camelback Road

Phoenix, Arizona 85016-9225

Telephone 602•530•8000

Facsimile 602•530•8500

E-mails: ken.motolenich@gknet.com

Attorney for Defendant Rearz, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Adult Printed Diapers, LLC,

Plaintiffs,

v.

Rearz, Inc., Cooshie Tooshiez, LLC d/b/a/

Crown Diapers, Faithfulness, LLC,

Personal Care Medical Supplies, Northeast

Mobility Center, SoftCradle.com,

Daynitecare.ca, Littleforbig.com,

Defendants.

No. 2:18-cv-00370-DJH

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE ON

BEHALF OF DEFENDANT REARZ,

INC.

Notice is hereby given that Kenneth Motolenich-Salas of the law firm Gallagher

& Kennedy, P.A. enters his appearance in this action as counsel for Defendant Rearz, Inc.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 28th day of March, 2018.

GALLAGHER & KENNEDY, P.A.

By:/s/Kenneth M. Motolenich-Salas

Kenneth M. Motolenich-Salas (027499)

2575 East Camelback Road

Phoenix, Arizona 85016

Attorney for Defendant Rearz, Inc.

Case 2:18-cv-00370-SMB Document 24 Filed 03/28/18 Page 1 of 2
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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 28th day of March, 2018, I electronically transmitted the

above document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing, which

transmits a Notice of Electronic Filing to all CM/ECF registrants in this action.

By: /s/ Kenneth M. Motolenich-Salas

Case 2:18-cv-00370-SMB Document 24 Filed 03/28/18 Page 2 of 2
|   | EXHIBIT 32.1 |   |
|--------|--------------|--------|

|   |
|--------|

|   | CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVEOFFICER REQUIRED BY EXCHANGE ACT RULE13a-14(b) |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|

| I, Dean E. Sukowatey, President of ALL Fuels & Energy Company (the “Company”), herebycertify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the accompanying report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal yearended December 31, 2007, and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended. I further certify that the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operationsof the Company. |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |
|--------|

| Dated: April 15, 2008. | /s/ DEAN E. SUKOWATEY |   |
|------------------------|-----------------------|--------|

|   | Dean E. Sukowatey

President |   |
|--------|------------------------------|--------|
**Exhibit
      23.01**











**Consent
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**









I.C.
      Isaacs & Company, Inc.


New
      York,
      New York




We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-8 (No. 333-63871, 333-46916 and 333-117735) of I.C. Isaacs & Company, Inc.
      of our report dated March 29, 2007, relating to the consolidated financial
      statements and financial statement schedule, which appear in this Form 10-K.






BDO
      Seidman,
      LLP


Bethesda,
      Maryland


April
      2,
      2007











*Back
      to Form 10K*
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 2512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1382]



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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Freight Forwarder License Applicants

    Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed 
with the Federal Maritime Commission applications for licenses as ocean 
freight forwarders pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 
(46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR 510).
    Persons knowing of any reason why any of the following applicants 
should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of 
Freight Forwarders, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, D.C. 
20573.

Marlins Consolidators, Inc. d/b/a International Cargo Service, 8333 NW 
66th Street, Miami, FL 33166, Officers: Nicholas Cedano, President, 
Sara F. Dion, Vice President/Secretary

    Dated: January 23, 1996.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-1382 Filed 1-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Roderick Bartlett, Chief Financial Officer of TransAct Energy Corp., (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:  (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2016 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78 o(d)); and  (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: December 16, 2016  /s/ Rod Bartlett Roderick C. Bartlett Chief Financial Officer    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been furnished to TransAct Energy Corp. and will be retained by TransAct Energy Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 99-60321 -1-

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-60321 Summary Calendar

ALIDA JENKINS OBINYAM, Petitioner,

versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

-------------------- Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A74-648-352

-------------------- March 24, 2000 Before REAVLEY, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Alida Jenkins Obinyam petitions this court to review the decision of Board of Immigration Appeals denying her application for asylum and withholding of deportation. Obinyam challenges the Immigration Judge’s adverse credibility determination. This court does not review decisions based upon credibility determinations. See Chun v. INS , 40 F.3d 76, 78 (5th Cir. 1994).

Obinyam’s petition for review is DENIED.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the IOMED, Inc. (the “Company”) Annual Reporton Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2005, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, BrianL. Mower, Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date:  | September 27,  2005 | By:    | /s/ BRIAN L.  MOWER, CPA  |   |
|--------|--------------------------|--------|---------------------------|--------|
|   |                     |   | Brian L. Mower,  CPA      |
|   |                     |   | Chief Accounting  Officer |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to IOMED, Inc.and will be retained by IOMED, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
#### Ex Parte Charles William QUINBY.

No. 72463.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Sept. 11, 1996.

Charles William, Humble, Pro Se.

John B. Holmes, District Attorney, Houston, Matthew Paul, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

*OPINION*

PER CURIAM.

This is a post-conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to Article 11.07, V.AC.C.P. Applicant was convicted of possession of less than one gram of cocaine, committed October 3, 1994. After his community supervision was revoked punishment was assessed at sixteen months in a state jail facility and a fine of $500. No appeal was taken from this conviction.

Applicant contends that he has improperly been denied credit for time he spent in a state jail facility as a condition of community supervision. The trial court has entered findings that Applicant was confined in a state jail facility as a condition of community supervision from October 20,1994, to December 5,1994, but was not given credit for this confinement when his community supervision was revoked. However, the trial court also concludes that Article 42.03, § 2(a), V.AC.C.P., conflicts with Article 42.12, § 15(h)(3), V.AC.C.P., as to whether Applicant is entitled to credit for this period.

Art. 42.03, § 2(a) provides:

> In all criminal cases the judge of the court in which the defendant was convicted shall give the defendant credit on his sentence for the time that the defendant has spent in jail in said cause, other than confinement served as a condition of community supervision, from the time of his arrest and confinement until his sentence by the trial court.

Art. 42.12, § 15(h)(3), provides:

> A judge shall credit against any time a defendant is subsequently required to serve in a state jail facility after revocation of community supervision any time served by the defendant in a state jail facility after sentencing.

*566We do not perceive any conflict between these provisions. Art. 42.03, § 2(a) *requires*a trial court to give credit for jail time which is not a condition of community supervision, but does not itself *■preclude*credit for confinement as a condition of community supervision, although other statutes do preclude such credit under some situations. E.g., Art. 42.12, § 18(c), V.A.C.C.P. (time confined in a community corrections facility). However, Art. 42.12, § 15(h)(3) *requires*credit for time in a state jail facility as a condition of state jail felony community supervision, and § 15(h)(2)(B) *permits*credit for similar periods of confinement in a county jail.1

Section 15(h)(3) requires that credit be given for the period Applicant was confined in a state jail facility as a condition of his community supervision. Applicant is entitled to relief.

Relief is granted. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice, state jail division, shall credit Applicant’s sentence in cause number 9423188 from the 180th Judicial District Court of Harris County with the additional period from October 20,1994, to December 5, 1994.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, state jail division.

1

. Art. 42.12, § 15(h)(2)(B) has been deleted effective January 1, 1996.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MIGUEL ANGEL LOPEZ-VELEZ,

Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

Respondent.

No. 14-70499

Agency No. A087-906-024

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 26, 2016**

Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Miguel Angel Lopez-Velez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for 

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an 

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of 

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our 

 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

AUG 3 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 14-70499 

jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence 

the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th 

Cir. 2006). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. 

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Lopez-Velez did 

not establish changed or extraordinary circumstances to excuse his untimely 

asylum application. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(4), (5); see also Ramadan v. 

Gonzalez, 479 F.3d 646, 656-58 (9th Cir. 2007). Thus, we deny Lopez-Velez’s 

petition as to his asylum claim. 

Lopez-Velez’s counseled opening brief does not raise any arguments 

challenging the agency’s rejection of his withholding of removal or CAT claims. 

See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not 

supported by argument in the brief are deemed abandoned).

Lopez-Velez asserts his case warrants remand and reopening based on 

“newly discovered facts” and potential eligibility for adjustment of status, waiver 

of inadmissibility, or relief pursuant to NACARA. We lack jurisdiction to 

consider these claims because Lopez-Velez did not present them to the agency. 

See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004). 

Finally, Lopez-Velez’s claim that his case warrants prosecutorial discretion 
 3 14-70499 

is not subject to judicial review. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 

(9th Cir. 2012) (order).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 117 (Monday, June 17, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 30616]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15310]



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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Dkt. C-3644]


Mama Tish's Italian Specialties, Inc.; Prohibited Trade 
Practices, and Affirmative Corrective Actions

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Consent order.

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

SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged violations of federal law prohibiting 
unfair or deceptive acts or practices and unfair methods of 
competition, this consent order prohibits, among other things, an 
Illinois ice cup dessert manufacturer from misrepresenting the 
existence or amount of calories or any other nutrient or ingredient in 
any frozen dessert product.

DATES: Complaint and Order issued March 19, 1996.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Copies of the Complaint and the Decision and Order are 
available from the Commission's Public Reference Branch, H-130, 6th 
Street & Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C. Steven Baker, FTC/Chicago Regional 
Office, 55 E. Monroe St., Suite 1437, Chicago, IL. 60603. (312) 353-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8156.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Wednesday, January 3, 1996, there was 
published in the Federal Register, 61 FR 168, a proposed consent 
agreement with analysis In the Matter of Mama Tish's Italian 
Specialties, Inc., for the purpose of soliciting public comment. 
Interested parties were given sixty (60) days in which to submit 
comments, suggestions or objections regarding the proposed form of the 
order.
    No comments having been received, the Commission has ordered the 
issuance of the complaint in the form contemplated by the agreement, 
made its jurisdictional findings and entered an order to cease and 
desist, as set forth in the proposed consent agreement, in disposition 
of this proceeding.

(Sec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U.S.C. 46. Interprets or applies sec. 5, 
38 Stat. 719, as amended; 15 U.S.C. 45, 52)
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-15310 Filed 6-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M