alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

BYRON FELTON,

Plaintiff,

v.

CIVIC PROPERTY & CASUALTY CO.

Defendant.

 /

Case No. 09-12063

Honorable Patrick J. Duggan

OPINION AND ORDER

At a session of said Court, held in the U.S.

District Courthouse, City of Detroit, County of

Wayne, State of Michigan, on August 31, 2009.

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN

U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

On May 1, 2009, Byron Felton (“Plaintiff”) filed this lawsuit in Wayne County

Circuit Court alleging that Civic Property and Casualty Company (“Defendant”)

wrongfully denied coverage on a fire-loss claim to Plaintiff’s insured property. On May

28, 2009, Defendant removed Plaintiff’s lawsuit to this Court on the basis of diversity

jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332, 1441. On June 9, 2009, Defendant filed an answer

with affirmative defenses to Plaintiff’s complaint. Presently before the Court is a Motion

to Amend Answer filed by Defendant on August 13, 2009. Pursuant to Rule 15 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant seeks leave to amend its answer so as to

include and affirmative defense that was inadvertently omitted from its June 9, 2009,

answer. Plaintiff filed a response opposing Defendant’s motion on August 26, 2009.

When a party seeks leave to amend a pleading, “[t]he court should freely give leave

when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). “Factors that may affect that

2:09-cv-12063-PJD-DAS Doc # 15 Filed 08/31/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 50
determination include undue delay in filing, lack of notice to the opposing party, bad faith

by the moving party, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by previous amendment, undue

prejudice to the opposing party, and futility of the amendment.” Seals v. Gen’l Motors

Corp., 546 F.3d 766, 770 (6th Cir. 2008). Under the circumstances of this case, justice

requires that Defendant be allowed to amend its answer. Although two months have

passed since the filing of the original answer, there is no evidence of undue delay or bad

faith by Defendant. Furthermore, the Court’s scheduling order in this case reveals that

three months remain for the parties to conduct discovery. (Scheduling Order, Docket No.

11.) Given this time, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has received adequate notice of

the defense and will not be unduly prejudiced by the amendment.

Rather than opposing Defendant’s motion on any of the foregoing grounds, Plaintiff

objects merely because Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that

“[e]very defense to a claim for relief . . . be asserted in the responsive pleading . . . .” 

However, once Defendant files its amended answer, the inadvertently omitted defense

will be asserted in the responsive pleading as required by Rule 12.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Amend Answer is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall file its amended answer on or

before SEPTEMBER 8, 2009.

s/PATRICK J. DUGGAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Copies to:

Allen J. Counard, Esq. and Mark S. Hayduk, Esq.

2:09-cv-12063-PJD-DAS Doc # 15 Filed 08/31/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 51
2009 EXECUTIVE CASH INCENTIVE PROGRAM






Exhibit 10.30


 


BUFFALO WILD WINGS, INC.


2009 EXECUTIVE CASH INCENTIVE PROGRAM


FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OTHER THAN CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


 


Our executive cash incentive program for fiscal 2009 under the previously adopted Cash Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) for the executive officers, other than the Chief Executive Officer was approved on December 4, 2008 by the Board of Directors pursuant to a recommendation by the Compensation Committee.  A 2009 cash incentive program for the Chief Executive Officer has not been adopted.  The Plan is designed to provide an annual incentive to executive officers based on the achievement of certain financial objectives, as well as individual personal objectives.  The financial objectives are set annually by our Board of Directors.  Payments under the 2009 program for achievement of Company financial objectives are based on the following: revenue, net income, same-store sales increases, increase in the number of Company locations, and increase in the number of franchise locations.


 


          The Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President, General Counsel may receive cash incentive payments of up to 108% of their base salary for the Company achieving financial objectives and up to an additional 20% of base salary on a discretionary basis for individual performance as determined in the discretion of our Board of Directors.  Other executive officers may receive cash incentive payments of up to 76.2% of base salary for achieving financial objectives and up to an additional 15% of base salary for individual performance.  The level of the cash incentive amount payable based on Company financial objectives varies depending upon the percentage of the objective that we achieve.  If a certain minimum percentage for a Company financial objective is not achieved, no payment is paid for that objective.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4013 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4013

 To amend section 2118 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to extend the 
     Electric and Magnetic Fields Research and Public Information 
                         Dissemination program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 2, 1996

Mr. Walker (for himself, Mr. Brown of California, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Baker 
    of California, Mr. Ehlers, Mr. Stockman, Mr. Hall of Texas, Mr. 
   Traficant, Mr. Tanner, Mr. Roemer, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Davis, and Ms. 
   Lofgren) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Science, for 
a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 
                          committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend section 2118 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to extend the 
     Electric and Magnetic Fields Research and Public Information 
                         Dissemination program.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS.

    Section 2118 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13478) is 
amended in subsections (c)(5), (e)(5), (g)(3)(B), (j)(1), and (l) by 
striking ``1997'' each place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof 
``1998''.
                                 <all>
```
Case 2:09-mj-30247-JU Document 3 Filed 05/26/09 Page 1 of 1
NUMBER 13-12-00708-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

EDUARDO A. TREVINO, Appellant,

v.

CHERYL LAWSON, CHARLES E. MONROE, 

NORRIS JACKSON, TAMRA MCCOLLUCH, 

SANDRA CASTENADA, Appellees. 

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 343rd District Court 

of Bee County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Eduardo A. Trevino, filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the 

343rd District Court of Bee County, Texas, in cause number B-12-1124-CV-C. Appellant 

has filed a motion to withdraw the appeal and requests that this Court withdraw the appeal 

without prejudice.
2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant=s motion to 

withdraw the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.1(a). Appellant=s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby 

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the 

appellant."). Having dismissed the appeal at appellant=s request, no motion for 

rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. Any pending motions 

are dismissed as moot.

 PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

17th day of January, 2013.
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 on Form 10-Q of Blindspot Alert, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert J.
Salluzzo, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, 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 my 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
      Company.




By:
              /s/ Robert J. SalluzzoRobert
      J. SalluzzoChief
      Financial Officer




Dated:
May 13, 2009





This
certification accompanies this report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purpose of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, another document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Blindspot Alert, Inc. and will be retained
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Exhibit 32.1











Certification

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





I, Byung Yim, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of TRB Systems International, Inc. (the "Company") do hereby certify, 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 my knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended June 30, 2007 of the Company, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):



(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 Registrant.







|                                                              |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|By: /s/ Byung Yim                                             |  | 
|Byung Yim, President, CEO & CFO                               |  | 
|(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer) |  | 



January 15, 2008
November 16 , 2017



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

RYAN CONSTRUCTION SE RVICES, LLC , AND BUILDERS BLUEPRINT, LLC , Appellant s
NO. 14

- 16

- 00181

- CV V.

R OBERT HALF INTERNATI ONAL, INC. , Appellee

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment signed January 11, 2016 , was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the order . We order the order of the court below AFFIRMED

. We order appellant s Ryan Construction Services, LLC and Builders Blueprint, LLC, jointly and severally, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Juan Garza, Jr., Appellant

No. 06

- 14

- 00054

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. F

- 1230953

- 1 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Carter participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the judgment of the court below. Therefore, we modify the trial court’s judgment to include an affirmative finding of family violence and the prior felony enhancement

. As modified, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. We note that the appellant, Juan Garza, Jr., has adequately indicated his inability to pay

costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED OCTOBER 30, 2014 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
EXHIBIT 32

                                  CERTIFICATION
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Lucky Strike
Explorations Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2010, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Michael Noble, as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss.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: November 12, 2010              By: /s/ Michael Noble
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Michael Noble
                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                         Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of ss.18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION

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

AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Douglas P. Rosefsky, as Chief Financial Officer of North Atlantic Trading
Company, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



(1) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission (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.



Dated: March 31, 2005



/s/ Douglas P. RosefskyDouglas P. RosefskyChief Financial Officer
Administrative Office of the United States Courts FOR COURT USE ONLY

TRANSCRIPT ORDER

DUE DATE:

OAO 435

AZ Form (Rev. 10/2018)

1. NAME 2. PHONE NUMBER 3. DATE

4. FIRM NAME

5. MAILING ADDRESS 6. CITY 7. STATE 8. ZIP CODE

9. CASE NUMBER 10. JUDGE DATES OF PROCEEDINGS

11. 12. 

13. CASE NAME LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS

14. 15. STATE

16. ORDER FOR

9 APPEAL 9 CRIMINAL

9 NON-APPEAL 9 CIVIL

9 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

9 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER (Specify)

17. TRANSCRIPT REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested.)

PORTIONS DATE(S) PORTION(S) DATE(S)

9TESTIMONY (Specify)

9PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING

9OTHER (Specify)

9VOIR DIRE

9OPENING STATEMENT (Plaintiff)

9OPENING STATEMENT (Defendant)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Plaintiff)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Defendant)

9OPINION OF COURT

9JURY INSTRUCTIONS

9SENTENCING

9BAIL HEARING

18. ORDER

CATEGORY

ORIGINAL + 1

(original to Court,

copy to ordering party)

FIRST

COPY

# OF

ADDITIONAL

COPIES

DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

(Check all that apply.)

ESTIMATED COSTS

30 DAYS 9 9

PAPER COPY

PDF (e-mail)

ASCII (e-mail)

14 DAYS 9 9

7 DAYS(expedited) 9 9

DAILY

9 9

HOURLY

9 9

REALTIME

9 9

E-MAIL ADDRESS

NOTE: IF ORDERING MORE THAN ONE FORMAT, 

THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE. 19. SIGNATURE

20. DATE

TRANSCRIPT TO BE PREPARED BY

ESTIMATE TOTAL

PROCESSED BY PHONE NUMBER

ORDER RECEIVED DATE BY

DEPOSIT PAID DEPOSIT PAID

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED TOTAL CHARGES

TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED LESS DEPOSIT

ORDERING PARTY NOTIFIED

TO PICK UP TRANSCRIPT

TOTAL REFUNDED

PARTY RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT TOTAL DUE

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT ORDER COPY

3 DAYS

CERTIFICATION (19. & 20.) By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges

(deposit plus additional).

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1797 Filed 09/18/23 Page 1 of 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 Quarterly Report of Promotions On Wheels Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Barry Van Wie, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his 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.



By:   /s/ Barry Van Wie

Barry Van Wie

Chief Executive Officer

Chief Accounting Officer



Dated: May 10, 2007
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-16-00678-CV

Vincent Salvo and Kim Tanner, Petitioners

v.

Pacesetter Homes, LLC and La Ventana Ranch Owners Association, Inc., Respondents

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, 428TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 15-2512, HONORABLE WILLIAM R. HENRY, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Petitioners Vincent Salvo and Kim Tanner have filed a motion to dismiss their

petition for permissive appeal and alternative petition for writ of mandamus. In their motion,

petitioners represent that the parties have settled the underlying dispute and agree to the dismissal.

We grant the motion and dismiss the petition for permissive appeal and alternative petition for writ

of mandamus.1

__________________________________________

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Filed: January 6, 2017

See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1). We dismiss as moot respondent La VentanaRanch Owners

1

Association, Inc.’s motion to dismiss petitioners’ petition for permissive appeal.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JAMES CUNNINGHAM,

Petitioner, Case No. 08-14283

HON. JOHN CORBETT O’MEARA

v.

MARY BERGHUIS,

Respondent,

____________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is a report and recommendation to deny Petitioner’s application for a

writ of habeas corpus, filed July 19, 2010 by Magistrate Judge Paul J. Komives. Petitioner filed

objections to the report and recommendation on August 16, 2010. 

This Court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or

specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(C). The Court “may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate.” Id. 

Having reviewed the record, it is hereby ORDERED that the report and recommendation

is ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of this court, and Petitioner’s application for a writ

of habeas corpus is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 

s/John Corbett O’Meara 

United States District Judge

Date: September 16, 2010
2

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on this date, September 16, 2010, using the ECF system.

s/William Barkholz 

Case Manager
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON
PAGES F-3 AND F-4 OF THE COMPANY'S 10KSB FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             489
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      397
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                         56
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   109
<PP&E>                                             541
<DEPRECIATION>                                     106
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,351
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,629
<BONDS>                                          4,825
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             3
<OTHER-SE>                                     (4,106)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,351
<SALES>                                          2,763
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,655
<CGS>                                            2,454
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,590
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,004
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,118
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,057)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       320
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,377)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 11,383
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,760)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (5.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (5.02)


</TABLE>