alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-2697
MUHAMMAD WALIYULLAH KARIM ABDUL QADIR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EVERETTE TAYLOR, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-95-920-19BC) Submitted: January 11, 1996 Decided: January 23, 1996 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Muhammad Waliyullah Karim Abdul, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Foster McLeod, GRIGGS, SPRUILL & HARRIS, Cheraw, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Qadir v. Taylor ,No. CA-95-920-19BC (D.S.C. Aug. 21, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion for a protective order and dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                 --------------

                                 CERTIFICATIONS
                                 --------------

I, Steve Bailey, certify that:


     1.   I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D
          required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report
          on Form 10-K of CHL Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2006-11 (the "Exchange
          Act periodic reports");

     2.   Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
          whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
          information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
          covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic
          reports;

     4.   I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
          servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance review(s)
          conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement(s) required
          in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
          disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer(s) have
          fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all
          material respects; and

     5.   All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
          for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
          assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
          securities required to be included in this report in accordance with
          Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18
          have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
          disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
          described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
          10-K.

     In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
     provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The Bank of New York,
     as Trustee.

Date: March 26, 2007


     /s/ Steve Bailey
     ----------------------------
     Steve Bailey
     Senior Managing Director, Loan Administration
##### 



Exhibit 10.15
 A000637185POLK COUNTY RECORDERPOLK COUNTY, MINNESOTACERTIFIED, FILED, ANDRECORDED ON03/26/2007 09:00AMPAGES: 7REC FEES: $46.00MICHELLE M. COTEPOLK COUNTY RECORDERBy:
    
    /s/ [ILLEGIBLE]
    
    Deputy
 SECOND AMENDED OPTION TO
PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY
 IN CONSIDERATION Richard Scott Carroll and Dwana Jean Carroll, Agassiz Energy, LLC, a
 1 2 1 4
  1 2 1 4 1 4 1 4




---



##### 



1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4
   SECTION ONE
 PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT
   SECTION TWO
 PERIOD OF OPTION
  -2-




---



##### 



SECTION THREE
 TITLE
    SECTION FOUR
 CLOSING
  -3-




---



##### 



SECTION FIVE
 POSSESSION
  SECTION SIX
 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
  -4-




---



##### 



SECTION SEVEN
 TESTING
  SECTION EIGHT
 NOTICES
  Sellers:
    
    P.O. Box 274Erskine, MN 56535Purchaser:
    
    Donald SargeantPresident and Chief Manager510 County Road 71Crookston, MN 56716
  SECTION NINE
 GOVERNING LAW
  -5-




---



##### 



SECTION TEN
 AMENDMENT
  SECTION ELEVEN
 ASSIGNMENT AND SUCCESSION
   SELLERS:
    
    
    
    PURCHASER:AGASSIZ ENERGY, LLC/s/ Richard Scott Carroll

RICHARD SCOTT CARROLL
    
    
    
    By
    
    /s/ Donald Sargeant

Donald Sargeant, Chief Manager/s/ DWana Jean Carroll

DWANA JEAN CARROLL
    
    
    
    By
    
    /s/ Larry Altringer

Larry Altringer, Treasurer
 -6-




---



##### 



STATE OF MINNESOTA
    
    
    ))
    
    
    ss.COUNTY OF POLK
    
    
    )
 st Richard Scott Carroll and Dwana Jean Carroll,
 /s/ Jonas O. Sandberg

Notary Public, Polk County, MNMy Comm. Expires:(SEAL)
 STATE OF MINNESOTA
    
    
    ))
    
    
    ss.COUNTY OF POLK
    
    
    )
 st Donald Sargeant and Larry Altringer, Agassiz Energy, LLC,
 /s/ Jonas O. Sandberg

Notary Public, Polk County, MNMy Comm. Expires:(SEAL)
 
 -7-
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of Porter Bancorp, Inc.



|                           |  |                              |  |                           
|-------------------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | --------------------------
|Direct Subsidiary          |  | Jurisdiction of Organization |  | Does Business As          
|PBI Bank                   |  | Kentucky                     |  | PBI Bank                  
|Asencia Statutory Trust I  |  | Connecticut                  |  | Asencia Statutory Trust I 
|Porter Statutory Trust II  |  | Connecticut                  |  | Porter Statutory Trust II 
|Porter Statutory Trust III |  | Connecticut                  |  | Porter Statutory Trust III
|Porter Statutory Trust IV  |  | Connecticut                  |  | Porter Statutory Trust IV 
|PBIB Corporation, Inc.     |  | Kentucky                     |  | PBIB Corporation, Inc.    



|                                   |  |                              |  |                                    |  |                       
|---------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|Indirect Subsidiary                |  | Jurisdiction of Organization |  | Does Business As                   |  | Parent Entity         
|PBI Title Services, LLC            |  | Kentucky                     |  | PBI Title Services, LLC            |  | PBI Bank              
|Durham-Mudd Insurance Agency, Inc. |  | Kentucky                     |  | Durham-Mudd Insurance Agency, Inc. |  | PBI Bank              
|Catalyst Financial Services, Inc.  |  | Kentucky                     |  | Catalyst Financial Services, Inc.  |  | PBIB Corporation, Inc.



78
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: SIDNEY T. SCARLETT, 

______________________________ 

SIDNEY T. SCARLETT, 

Appellant, 

 v. 

DEVIN DERHAM-BURK, Chapter 13 

trustee, 

Appellee.

No. 17-15799 

D.C. No. 5:16-cv-05371-LHK 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Lucy H. Koh, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 27, 2018**

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Sidney T. Scarlett appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing 

his bankruptcy appeal for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction under 28 

 

* 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

DEC 3 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-15799 

U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Ahanchian v. Xenon 

Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1258 (9th Cir. 2010) (denial of extension of time); 

Moneymaker v. CoBEN (In re Eisen), 31 F.3d 1447, 1451 (9th Cir. 1994)

(dismissal for failure to prosecute). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Scarlett a further 

extension of time and dismissing Scarlett’s bankruptcy appeal for failure to 

prosecute after it granted him two extensions of time to file the opening brief and 

warned that failure to file an opening brief by the extended due date would result in 

dismissal of his appeal. See In re Eisen, 31 F.3d at 1451-56 (discussing factors for 

district court to weigh in determining whether to dismiss for failure to prosecute; 

noting that dismissal should not be disturbed unless there is a definite and firm 

conviction that the court below committed a clear error of judgment in the 

conclusion it reached upon a weighing of the relevant factors (citations and internal 

quotation marks omitted)). 

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Scarlett’s motion 

for reconsideration because Scarlett failed to establish any basis for relief. See Sch. 

Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir.

1993) (setting forth standard of review and grounds for reconsideration). 

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 169 (Friday, August 29, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 51038]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20129]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i> 11370]


New Hampshire Disaster Number NH-00006

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of New 
Hampshire ( FEMA-1782-DR ), dated 08/11/2008.
    Incident: Severe Storms, Tornado, and Flooding.
    Incident Period: 07/24/2008.
    Effective Date: 08/20/2008.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 10/10/2008.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 05/11/2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of New 
Hampshire, dated 08/11/2008, is hereby amended to include the following 
areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

Primary Counties: Merrimack, Strafford.
Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    New Hampshire: Sullivan.

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-20129 Filed 8-28-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTIONS 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of IBroadband, Inc., on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Matthew Hutchins, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sections 906 of the Sabanes-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 al material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

IBroadband, Inc.





By/s/ Matthew Hutchins









Chief Financial and Executive Officer



July 20, 2006
Exhibit
32





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT BY


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Penn-Pacific Corp., on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,
Rose Fischer, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and
belief:





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.








Date:
January 22,
2009











/s/ Rose
Fischer


Rose
Fischer


President


(Principal
Executive & Accounting Officer)








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, 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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Farion WALKER, Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Appellee.

No. 02-2009.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 28, 2002.

Decided Nov. 15, 2002.

Before WOLLMAN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

[UNPUBLISHED]

PER CURIAM.

Farion Walker appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits. In his March 1998 application and later documents, Walker alleged disability since July 1997 from hypertension, chest pain, an ulcer, migraines, a hearing loss, diabetes, and problems with his shoulder, thumb, sinuses, knees, and back. After a hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) found that Walker could perform his past relevant work as a security guard as he described the job requirements and as the job is performed in the national economy.

We reject Walker’s challenge to the ALJ’s credibility findings, as the ALJ listed the factors from *Polaski v. Heckler,*739 F.2d 1320,1321-22 (8th Cir.1984), and then gave multiple valid reasons for finding not entirely credible Walker’s statements as to the impact of his impairments on his ability to work. *See Lowe v. Apfel,*226 F.3d 969, 972 (8th Cir.2000) (if adequately explained and supported, credibility findings are for ALJ to make; ALJ is not required to discuss methodically each *Polaski*factor, as long as he acknowledges and examines them).

Walker also challenges the ALJ’s residual-functional-capacity (RFC) findings, contending he cannot do a good deal of walking and standing, *see*20 C.F.R. § 404.1567(b) (2002) (defining light work), or perform light work on a daily basis. We disagree: none of Walker’s doctors gave him any restrictions during the relevant period, a nurse practitioner’s opinion as to his RFC on “bad” days appeared to be based primarily on Walker’s reports, and the ALJ’s RFC findings were more generous to Walker than those of the Social Security Administration reviewing physicians. *See Pearsall v. Massanari,*274 F.3d 1211, 1217-18 (8th Cir.2001) (it is ALJ’s responsibility to determine RFC *800based on medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and claimant’s description of his limitations; ALJ must first evaluate claimant’s credibility).

As to Walker’s remaining arguments, the ALJ adequately weighed the Department of Veterans Affairs’ disability determination, *see Morrison v. Apfel,*146 F.3d 625, 628 (8th Cir.1998), and properly considered the combined effects of Walker’s impairments, *see Hajek v. Shalala,*30 F.3d 89, 92 (8th Cir.1994).

The judgment is affirmed.

A true copy.

1

. The Honorable John F. Forster, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>        5
<MULTIPLIER>     1
<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                              73,205
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                       87,524
<ALLOWANCES>                             0
<INVENTORY>                         41,443
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   215,006
<PP&E>                           4,538,743
<DEPRECIATION>                   4,469,808
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     285,048
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            1,331,066
<BONDS>                                  0
<COMMON>                           159,720
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<OTHER-SE>                     (1,046,018)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       285,048
<SALES>                            372,573
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   389,580
<CGS>                              245,572
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      245,572
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                   148,651
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  22,779
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   (25,772)
<INCOME-TAX>                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               (25,772)
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                      (25,772)
<EPS-BASIC>                        (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                        (.02)


</TABLE>
#### Ralph THIBODEAUX v. TEXAS & NEW ORLEANS RAILROAD CO. et al.

No. 2326.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Feb. 18, 1942.

A. Wilmot Dalferes, of Lafayette, for appellant.

James J. Martin and E. L. Guidry, both of St. Martinville, for appellees.

DORE, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the consolidated cases of Adrien Thibodeaux et al. v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad Company et al., 6 So.2d 224, this day handed down, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

Consent ofIndependent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-135777) pertaining to the Houston Wire& Cable Company 2000 Stock Plan and the Houston Wire & Cable Company2006 Stock Plan of our report dated March 9, 2007, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements of Houston Wire & Cable Company includedin this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2006.
|  | /s/ Ernst & Young LLP |
|--|---------------------------|

 

Houston, Texas

March 9, 2007

----
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document





































 



 
 

  EXHIBIT 4.2    
    

 






					
	 Number

B-
	 	Incorporated Under the Laws of the State of Delaware	 	Shares

-0-

Cusip No.




 

  
 

  LIBERTY TRIPADVISOR HOLDINGS, INC.
  
    Series B Common Stock, par value $.01 per share
  
    Specimen Certificate    
    


        This Certifies that [                    ] is the owner of
[                    ] FULLY PAID AND
NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF SERIES B COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $0.01 PER SHARE, OF LIBERTY TRIPADVISOR HOLDINGS, INC. (hereinafter called the "Corporation") transferable on the books of the
Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of the Certificate properly endorsed. This
Certificate                    is not valid unless countersigned by the
Transfer Agent and registered by the Registrar. 


Witness,
the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized officers. 


Dated: 


Liberty
TripAdvisor Holdings, Inc.

[Corporate Seal] 

 






			
	





  President	 	





  Secretary




 

 








QuickLinks



EXHIBIT 4.2


LIBERTY TRIPADVISOR HOLDINGS, INC. Series B Common Stock, par value $.01 per share Specimen Certificate
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**THE PENN TRAFFIC COMPANY**

 

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 The PennTraffic Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal year ending July 29,2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Tod A. Nestor, Senior Vice President Chief Financial Officerof the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted 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 results of operations of the  Company. |

 

 
| /s/  Tod A. Nestor                                 |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Tod  A. Nestor                                     |
| Senior  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

May 14,2008

 

----
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12** 
**- 6317** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,
Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
BERNARD KING, a/k/a Shaborn ,
Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Rebecca Beach Smith , Chief District Judge. ( 2:94

- cr
- 00163

- RBS

- 14 )

Submi t ted : May 24, 2012 Decided: May 31, 2012

Before MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Bernard King, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Pellatiro Tayman, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpubl ished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Bernard King appeals a district court order denying

his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)

(2006). We affirm. Because the amendment in question did not

lowe r Gore’s Guidelines sentence, we find the district did not

abuse its discretion denying the motion. United States v.

Goines , 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004) (stating standard of

review). Accordingl y, we affirm the district court’ s order. We
dispense wi th oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED