alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.6
 THIRD AMENDMENT TO DARK FIBER IRU AGREEMENT
 MFS RCN th




---



##### 



METROPOLITAN FIBER SYSTEMS OF NEW 
YORK, INC.
    
    
    
    RCN TELECOM SERVICES, INC.By:
    /s/ Thomas F. Meagher
    
    
    
    By:
    /s/ Richard P. SwiderskiName:
    Thomas F. Meagher
    
    
    
    
    Name:
    Richard P. SwiderskiTitle:

    Director
    
    
    
    
    Title:

    VP  Network EngineeringDate:
    12/1/08
    
    
    
    
    Date:
    11/18/08
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has d etermined that this opinion should not be published and is not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. 97-50782

DARLENE PARRA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PREMIER SALONS INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

El Paso Division

USDC No. EP 96 CA 483 SS

November 5, 1998

Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Premier Salons International, Inc. appe als an adverse jury verdict on the issue of

d iscriminat o ry discharge of Darlene Parra. The jury returned its verdict finding that Premier had

discriminated against Parra based on her national origin by discharging her in violation of 42 U.S.C.

§ 2000e et seq (“Title VII”). The jury awarded her damages for lost wages, present and future

emotional pain and suffering, and pecuniary losses. The jury also awarded punitive damages which

the district court, upon acting on Premier’s post trial motion for judgment as a matter of law, held

was not supported by the evidenc e. The distri ct court al so entered an order awardi ng Parra

attorney’s fees. Premier timely appealed to this court.2

Appellant assigns three points of error. First, appellant claims that the district court erred in

denying its motion for judgment as a matter of law becaus e Parra had failed to present sufficient

evidence to support a claim of national origin discriminatio n. Next , appellant contends that the

district court’s decision not to include a jury instruction on same actor inference was error. Finally,

appellant argues that the district court erred in denying its motion for judgment as a m atter of law

regarding Parra’s claim for compensatory damages.

Having considered the arguments of counsel, the briefs, the record and the applicable law, we

affirm the judgment of the district court for essentially the reasons expressed by the district court in

its order granting in part and overruling in part Premier Salon’s International’s Renewed Moti on for

Judgment as a Matter of Law.

AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

FILED

MAY 19 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ANNE PRAFADA, individually on her 

own behalf and as Guardians Ad Litem 

of M; on behalf of D.M.,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

MESA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

 Defendant - Appellee,

and

STATE OF ARIZONA,

 Defendant.

No. 18-17139

D.C. No. 2:18-cv-00718-DGC

U.S. District Court for Arizona, 

Phoenix

MANDATE

The judgment of this Court, entered February 06, 2020, takes effect this 

date. 

This constitutes the formal mandate of this Court issued pursuant to Rule 

41(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

FOR THE COURT:

MOLLY C. DWYER

CLERK OF COURT

By: Jessica Flores 

Deputy Clerk

Ninth Circuit Rule 27-7

Case 2:18-cv-00718-DGC Document 77 Filed 05/19/20 Page 1 of 1
#### Bruce KUZMA, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 42259.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

April 24, 1990.

Rosalynn Koch, Columbia, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., M. Melissa Manda, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

*898Before NUGENT, C.J., FENNER, J., and WASSERSTROM, Senior Judge.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from denial, without evi-dentiary hearing, of Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
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 

MICHAEL BAILEY 

United States Attorney 

ANNA WRIGHT

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

NATHANIEL J. WALTERS 

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

State Bar No.: 029708 

405 West Congress, Suite 4800 

Tucson, Arizona 85701-5040 

Telephone: (520) 620-7300 

E-mail: anna.wright@usdoj.gov 

 nathaniel.walters@usdoj.gov 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

Scott Daniel Warren, 

 Defendant.

CR-18-00223-RCC (DTF) 

NOTICE OF INTENT TO USE 

DEFENDANT’S CONFESSIONS, 

ADMISSIONS AND STATEMENTS 

PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 16.1

 The United States of America, by and through its undersigned attorneys, hereby 

gives notice, pursuant to Rule 16.1 of the Local Rules of Criminal Practice of the United 

States District Court for the District of Arizona, that all confessions, admissions and 

statements provided in the government’s disclosure will be introduced into evidence by the 

government at the trial in this matter. See United States v. Hall, 742 F.2d 1153, 1156 (9th 

Cir. 1984); United States v. Long, 455 F.2d 962, 963 (9th Cir. 1972). 

Although not required under Rule 16.1, in an abundance of caution, the government 

also gives notice that it may introduce any and all prior testimony given by the defendant 

in this matter and in the misdemeanor matter (17-MJ-341). Similarly, the government gives 

notice that it may introduce any public statements made by the defendant, including written 

and oral statements made to the media. 

/// 
- 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 

Respectfully submitted this 30th day of September, 2019. 

 

 MICHAEL BAILEY 

United States Attorney 

District of Arizona 

 /s/ Anna R. Wright & Nathaniel J. Walters

 ANNA WRIGHT & 

 NATHANIEL J. WALTERS 

 Assistant U.S. Attorneys 

Copy of the foregoing served electronically or by 

other means this 30th day of September, 2019, to: 

All ECF participants
WEINBERG & COMPANY, PA
                        Town Executive Center
                     6100 Glades Road, Suite 314
                      Boca Raton, Florida 33434


          CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT


We hereby consent to the use in the Form 10-KSB of Tunlaw International
Corporation of our report for the period from March 27, 1997 (inception)
to December 31, 1998 dated February 19, 1999 relating to teh financial
statements of Tunlaw International Corporation which appear in
such Form 10-KSB.

                              WEINBERG & COMPANY PA
                              Certified Public Accountants


Boca Raton, Florida 
March 8, 1999
## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### FEB 10 2005 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
DESI GALLEGOS,

Petitioner-Appellant, No. 04-1352
v. (D.C. No. 04-Z-1198) CARL ZENON, Warden, A.V.C.F.; JOE ORTIZ, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Corrections; and KEN SALAZAR, Attorney General of the State of Colorado, (D. Colo.)

Respondents-Appellees.
ORDER
Before BRISCOE , McKAY , and HARTZ , Circuit Judges.

This is a pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2254 prisoner appeal. Mr. Gallegos is a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections. He challenges his August 27, 1997, Colorado state court conviction for vehicular homicide. Mr. Gallegos filed his federal petition on June 3, 2004. The magistrate judge subsequently ordered Mr. Gallegos to show cau se within thirty days why the application should not be denied as time-barred pur suant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Following submission of a response, the district co urt dismissed the action as time-barred. This appeal followed.-2-

The district court denied Mr. Gallegos’s applicatio n for a certificate of appealability and his request to proceed in forma pauperis . He then applied to this court for a certificate of appealability and r enewed his application to proceed in forma pauperis
. In order for this court to grant a certificate of appealability, Petitioner must make a “substantial showing of the denial of a cons titutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). To do so, Petitioner must demon strate “that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree th at) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the iss ues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Slack v . McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (quotations omitted). We have carefully reviewed Petitioner’s brief, the district court’s disposition, and the record on appeal. Nothing in the facts, the record on appeal, or Petitioner’s brief raises an issue that meets ou r standards for the grant of a certificate of appealability. For substantially th e same reasons as set forth by the district court in its Order of August 20, 2004, we cannot say “that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner.” Id. We DENY Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealab ility and DISMISS the appeal. Appellant’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal-3-

is GRANTED
. Entered for the Court
Monroe G. McKay Circuit Judge
SCE Funding LLC
                     Annual Summary of Monthly Certificates
                            Year Ending December 1999
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                              Small
                                                                     Residential          Commercial
                                                                      Customers            Customers              Total
                                                                     -----------          ----------              -----

<S>                                                                  <C>                   <C>                  <C>
     Kilowatt hours of electricity billed                            22,514,941,724        3,951,449,402        26,466,391,126
     FTA Charged per kilowatt hour (Jan. 99 - Sep. 99)                        1.306(cent)          1.381(cent)             N/A
     FTA Charged per kilowatt hour (Oct. 99 - Dec. 99)                        1.235(cent)          1.306(cent)             N/A
     Billed FTA Charges                                                $317,663,057          $61,911,821          $379,574,879

     Estimated FTA Payments                                            $316,074,742          $61,664,174          $377,738,916

     Estimated Write-off                                                 $1,588,315             $247,647            $1,835,963
     Remittance Shortfall - increased payment                              $318,491              $38,913              $357,404
         to the Collection Account
     Excess Remittance - reduced payment                                   $537,971             $128,463              $666,434
         to the Collection Account
     Net Write-off*                                                      $1,368,835             $158,097            $1,526,933

     FTA Payments estimated to have been                               $325,000,585          $63,461,189          $388,461,774
         received by the Servicer
     Remittance Shortfall - increased payment                              $318,491              $38,913              $357,404
         to the Collection Account
     Excess Remittance - reduced payment                                   $537,971             $128,463              $666,434
         to the Collection Account
     Aggregate Remittance to Collection Account                        $324,781,105          $63,371,639          $388,152,744
</TABLE>



     * Write-offs for months July through December are estimated at 0.5%
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

30265

26-JUL-2013

08:03 AM
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Brett E. WILLIAMS, Appellant. Brett E. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. WD 48195, WD 49877.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

March 28, 1995.

Ellen H. Flottman, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Christine M. Koeot, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SPINDEN, P.J., and ULRICH and SMART, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted Brett Williams of two counts of delivering a controlled substance. He appeals the convictions and the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for postconvietion relief. We affirm the judgment of convictions and the denial of the postconvietion relief. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
Exhibit 13.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the annual report of RiT Technologies Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Simona Green, Vice President Finance of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



Date: June 30, 2004



/s/  Simona Green

Simona Green

Vice President Finance
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002











In connection with the quarterly report of White Dental Supply, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nancy White, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Michael White, acting
in the capacity as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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








/s/ Nancy White


Nancy White


Chief Executive Officer


August 14, 2009








/s/ Michael White


Michael White


Chief Financial Officer


August 14, 2009
Exhibit 32.2



SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), the undersigned, Bobby Story, Chief Financial Officer of XenaCare Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") has executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the "Report").



The undersigned certifies that: (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 20th day of May 2008.



| |  |  |                               
| |  |  | ------------------------------
| |  |  |                               
| |  |  |                               
| |  |  | XENACARE HOLDINGS, INC.       
| |  |  |                               
| |  |  | /s/ Bobby Story               
| |  |  | Name: Bobby Story             
| |  |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-2970

_____________________________

JAMES EMILE BERNIS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

James M. Colaw, Judge.

August 27, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

OSTERHAUS, C.J., and KELSEY and LONG, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

James Emile Bernis, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
EXHIBIT 32.1

       CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXCUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUENT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Reese Baglole, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350 as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to my knowledge, Madrona
Ventures Inc.'s Report on form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 31,
2008 fully complies with Section 13(a)-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 Madrona Ventures Inc.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
12th day of December, 2008.


/s/ Reese Baglole
-------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350
     (AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Madrona Ventures Inc.
(the "Company") for the period ended April 30, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), and
Madrona Ventures Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Reese Baglole, as Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Madrona Ventures Inc., hereby certify
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 Madrona
     Ventures Inc.

Dated: May 22, 2008                      /s/ Reese Baglole
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Reese Baglole
                                         Chief Executive Officer


Dated: May 22, 2008                      /s/ Reese Baglole
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Reese Baglole
                                         Chief Financial Officer
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002











In connection with the quarterly report of White Dental Supply, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three month periods ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nancy White, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Michael White, acting in the capacity as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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








/s/ Nancy White


Nancy White


Chief Executive Officer


May 16, 2011








/s/ Michael White


Michael White


Chief Financial Officer


May 16, 2011
VonLehman & Company Inc.                250 Grandview Drive Suite 300
Certified Public Accountants and Business Advisors
                                        Fort Mitchell, Kentucky 41017-5610

                                        4221 Malsbary Road Suite 102
                                        Cincinnati, Ohio 45242-5502

                      Accountants' Consent

July 17, 2000


Board of Directors
Masterpiece Technology Group, Inc.
Loveland, Ohio

This letter grants masterpiece Technology Group, Inc. (MPTG) permission to use
our independent Auditor's Opinion dated July 7, 2000 on the financial statements
for the year ended March 31, 2000 included as part of the Securities and
Exchange Commission filing of MPTG's Form 10K.

Sincerely,
-S-

VonLehman & Company
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 855 

Expressing support for designation of May 1 as ‘‘Silver Star Service Banner 

Day’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 22, 2009 

Mr. BLUNT (for himself, Mr. SKELTON, Mr. CLAY, Mr. AKIN, Mrs. EMERSON, 

Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mr. GRAVES, Mr. CARNAHAN, Mr. CLEAVER, and 

Mr. BARTLETT) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for designation of May 1 as ‘‘Silver Star 

Service Banner Day’’. 

Whereas the House of Representatives has always honored 

the sacrifices made by the wounded and ill members of 

the Armed Forces; 

Whereas the Silver Star Service Banner has come to represent the members of the Armed Forces and veterans 

who were wounded or became ill in combat in the wars 

fought by the United States; 

Whereas the Silver Star Families of America was formed to 

help the American people remember the sacrifices made 

by the wounded and ill members of the Armed Forces by 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 855 IH 

designing and manufacturing Silver Star Service Banners 

and Flags for that purpose; 

Whereas the sole mission of the Silver Star Families of 

America is to evoke memories of the sacrifices of members and veterans of the Armed Forces on behalf of the 

United States through the presence of a Silver Star Service Banner in a window or a Silver Star Flag flying; 

Whereas the sacrifices of members and veterans of the Armed 

Forces on behalf of the United States should never be 

forgotten; and 

Whereas May 1 would be an appropriate date to designate as 

‘‘Silver Star Service Banner Day’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

2 the designation of ‘‘Silver Star Service Banner Day’’ and 

3 calls upon the people of the United States to observe the 

4 day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS