alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

____________

No. 16-1662

____________

RONALD EDWARD GILLETTE,

 Appellant

v.

ACTING WARDEN DIANE PROSPER; 

JULIUS WILSON, in his capacity as the Director of Prisons; 

TERRITORY OF VIRGIN ISLANDS; 

ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

____________

On Appeal from the 

District Court of the Virgin Islands

(D.C. No. 1-14-cv-00110)

District Judge: Honorable Wilma A. Lewis

____________

Argued December 12, 2016

Before: CHAGARES, JORDAN, and HARDIMAN, 

Circuit Judges

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

The opinion filed June 2, 2017 is hereby amended to reflect the current firm and 

address information for counsel for appellant Joseph A. DiRuzzo, III. The opinion is 

amended as follows:

Joseph A. DiRuzzo, III (Argued)

Joseph A. DiRuzzo, III P.A.

633 SE Third Avenue, Suite 301

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301

Jeffrey J. Molinaro

Fuerst Ittleman David & Joseph, PL
1001 Brickell Bay Drive, 32nd Floor

Miami, FL 33131

Counsel for Plaintiff-Appellant

For the Court,

Marcia M. Waldron, Clerk

Date: June 5, 2017
Filed pursuant to
                                                                  Rule 424(b)(2)
                                                      Registration No. 333-32065

                                 $1,000,000,000
                                    CITICORP
                       Medium-Term Senior Notes, Series E
                    Medium-Term Subordinated Notes, Series E
                Due From 9 Months to 50 Years From Date of Issue

Pricing Supplement, dated August 19, 1997
  (To Prospectus Supplement, dated May 21, 1997,
  to Prospectus, dated May 21, 1997).

                              DESCRIPTION OF NOTES

         The terms of the Notes set forth in this Pricing Supplement supplement
and modify, to the extent applicable, the description of general terms and
provisions of Citicorp's Medium-Term Subordinated Notes, Series E, set forth in
the accompanying Prospectus and Prospectus Supplement. Capitalized terms not
defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the
accompanying Prospectus and Prospectus Supplement.

SUMMARY OF TERMS:

Title of Notes:         7.250% Subordinated Notes Due September 4, 2012 (the
                        "Notes").
Aggregate
Principal Amount:       $20,000,000.00.

Price to Public:        100.00%.

Issue Date:             September 4, 1997.

Stated Maturity Date:   September 4, 2012.

Interest Rate:          7.250%.

Interest Payment Dates: Quarterly, on the 4th day of March, June,September and
                        December, commencing December 4, 1997, and at Stated
                        Maturity.

Regular Record Dates:   Each date that is 15 calendar days prior to the related
                        Interest Payment Date.

Sinking Fund:           None.

Redemption:             The Notes are subject to redemption, in whole but not in
                        part, at the option of Citicorp, on not more than 60 or
                        less than 30 days' notice, on any Interest Payment Date
                        on or after September 4, 2000, at a redemption price of
                        100% of their principal amount plus accrued and unpaid
                        interest to the redemption date.


<PAGE>

Selling Agent:          Smith Barney Inc.

Agent's Commission:     1.750%.

Minimum Denomination:   $1,000.

CUSIP Number:           17303 MHB 8.
No. 72-6162.

#### Nelson *v.*California.

Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>


                                                                  Exhibit 12 (b)
                              J. C. Penney Company, Inc.
                            and Consolidated Subsidiaries

              Computation of Ratios of Available Income to Fixed Charges





                                              52 weeks               52 weeks
                                                ended                  ended
                                               Apr. 29,               May 1,
     ($ Millions)                               2000                  1999
                                              _________             _________

     Income from continuing operations        $      68             $     934
        (before income taxes and
        capitalized interest)

     Fixed charges

     Interest (including capitalized
     interest) on:

        Operating leases                            272                   225
        Short term debt                             109                   115
        Long term debt                              522                   558
        Capital leases                                1                     4
        Other, net                                    3                    (5)
                                              __________            __________
     Total fixed charges                            907                   897


                                              __________            __________
     Total available income                   $     975             $   1,831
                                              ==========            ==========

     Ratio of available income to
        fixed charges
                                                    1.1                   2.0
                                              ==========            ==========




     The Company believes that, due to the seasonal nature of its business,
     ratios for a period of time other than a 52 week period are inappropriate.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**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 theQuarterly Report of The Penn Traffic Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the fiscal period ending May 5, 2007, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gregory J. Young,President & Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

# (1)     The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

#  

# (2)     The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/  Gregory J. Young                  |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Gregory  J. Young                      |   |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

May 22, 2008

 

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 20, 2010 

d1013 

Order 

 

October 20, 2010 

140643 

BLOOMFIELD FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140643 

 COA: 294666 

Wayne CC: 03-312843-AV 

LeROI R. HASKINS, 

Defendant-Appellee, 

and 

GABE KAIMOWITZ, a/k/a HILLEL 

GABRIEL KAIMOWITZ, 

Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 25, 2009 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. William Poland, Relator, against Alma Poland, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Bronx County,

December 6, 1955.

*642
      *I. Ben Greenman*for relator.

*David Sherman for*defendant.

Thomas A. Aurelio, J.

Eelator brings on this writ of habeas corpus for an order granting him visitation rights and custody of his infant son, Steven B. Poland, who soon will be 11 years of age. It appears a final judgment of divorce between the parties was entered in this court, June 18,1946, and sole custody of the infant, then one year of age, was given to his mother, defendant herein. Eelator was directed to pay defendant the sum of $10 weekly for the support of the infant, and except for very few payments, relator has failed to comply with the order of this court. Eelator admits he has not seen his child for the past six and one-half years, and gives as an excuse for- staying away that he was afraid of being arrested for having failed to make the required payments for the support of his child. He remarried March 23,1947, and claims his financial condition prevented him from paying. Defendant married in 1951 and is now living happily with her second husband and the infant. With the consent of both sides, I interviewed the infant in the antechambers of the courtroom for about 20 minutes in the absence of the parties or their attorneys. The infant is a bright, alert and intelligent boy; and he stated that he has never seen his father, does not know what he looks like and does not care to visit with him; that he is happy with his stepfather who is very kind and good to him.

Defendant contends relator brought on this writ after she started proceedings in March of this year for the entry of a judgment against him for arrears of alimony and support and maintenance of the infant and that relator’s sudden desire to obtain visitation rights, after having abandoned the infant for many years, is for the sole purpose of harassing her and to force her to accept a smaller sum in settlement of the arrears. Defendant also contends that the sudden appearance of relator, as the father of the infant, at this late date, is bound to affect the child psychologically and mentally. This contention is not without merit, when considered in connection with the firm refusal of the infant to see or have anything to do with his father. Eelator claims that because he “ is presently living up to his obligation to continue the support of the said child ” the right of visitation cannot be refused him. This is not the law. The paramount consideration is the welfare of the child (see *Matter of Bock,*280 N. Y. 349; *Matter of Gustow,*220 N. Y. 373; *Matter of Heller,*54 N. Y. S. 2d 734).

*643Upon the entire record before me, I conclude that it will be for the best interests of this infant to deny visitation rights to the relator. Accordingly, the writ is dismissed, with $10 costs.
* 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 5TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED March 28, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40286 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FRANCES JUANITA MERAZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:04-CR-1454-2

-------------------- Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and OWEN, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM: * Frances Juanita Meraz appeals the district court’s sentence following her conviction of transporting illegal aliens for private financial gain in violation of 8 U.S.C § 1324. Meraz contends that the enhancement of her sentence for “reckless endangerment” pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(5) was unreasonable in light of United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), because she was not charged with reckless endangerment, she did not admit reckless endangerment, and the facts supporting the enhancementNo. 05-40286 -2- were not proved to the jury. She further asserts that the district court’s failure to make factual findings and the lack of any clear record supporting the enhancement renders the sentence unreasonable and requires remand for resentencing. Similarly, she contends that remand is required because the district court failed to make required factual findings regarding its denial of her request for a minor role adjustment. Meraz’s arguments are without merit. As Meraz was sentenced after the decision in Booker , there was no requirement that any sentencing facts be charged, admitted, or proved to a jury; the district court was free to make factual findings in the same manner as before Booker
. See United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). Further, as the Government correctly points out, the district court expressly adopted the findings of the Presentence Report in its Statement of Reasons. Adoption of the PSR is appropriate. See United States v. Peters , 283 F.3d 300, 314 (5th Cir. 2002); United States v. Carreon , 11 F.3d 1225, 1231 (5th Cir. 1994). Meraz makes no argument to the contrary, other than a conclusory assertion that the district court did not make required factual findings

. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### D. LEE, Plaintiff in Error, v. J. P. HARLLEE et al., as Board of County Commissioners of Manatee County, Florida, Defendants in Error.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 7, 1935.

Edwin Brobston, of Tampa, for plaintiff1 in error.

D. R. Peacock, of Bradenton, for defendants in error.

PER CURIAM.

This case is a companion case to that of I. Otto v. J. P. Harllee, et al. (Fla.) 161 So. 402, as board of county commissioners oi Manatee county, Fla., in which opinion and judgment has been filed at this term of court.

The judgment herein should be affirmed on authority of the opinion and judgment in the companion case above referred to. It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

WHITFIELD, C. J., and ELLIS, TERRELL, BUFORD, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
cfc3025.jpgThe Cincinnati Insurance CompanynThe Cincinnati Indemnity CompanyThe Cincinnati Casualty CompanynThe Cincinnati Specialty Underwriters Insurance CompanyThe Cincinnati Life Insurance CompanynCFC Investment CompanynCSU Producer Resources Inc.











Investor Contact: Dennis E. McDaniel, 513-870-2768


CINF-IR@cinfin.com


Media Contact : Betsy E. Ertel, 513-603-5323


Media_Inquiries@cinfin.com





Cincinnati Financial Corporation to Present at


Keefe, Bruyette & Woods 2016 Insurance Conference








Cincinnati, August 22, 2016 - Cincinnati Financial Corporation (Nasdaq: CINF) announced today that the company will participate in the Keefe, Bruyette & Woods 2016 Insurance Conference on September 7 from 8:45 to 9:25 a.m. ET. Steven J. Johnston, FCAS, MAAA, CFA, CERA, president and chief executive officer, and Michael J. Sewell, CPA, chief financial officer, senior vice president and treasurer, will represent the company.





The event will be carried live over the internet at cinfin.com/investors . Beginning on September 8, 2016, a replay of the event will be available for 30 days at the web address above.





About Cincinnati Financial


Cincinnati Financial Corporation offers business, home and auto insurance, our main business, through The Cincinnati Insurance Company and its two standard market property casualty companies. The same local independent insurance agencies that market those policies may offer products of our other subsidiaries, including life and disability income insurance, fixed annuities and surplus lines property and casualty insurance. For additional information about the company, please visit cinfin.com .





Mailing Address:  Street Address:


P.O. Box 145496  6200 South Gilmore Road


Cincinnati, Ohio 45250-5496  Fairfield, Ohio 45014-5141





***
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 3, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20363]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0829]


Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier East, Chicago, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the Navy Pier East Safety Zone in 
Chicago Harbor on September 30, 2008. This action is necessary to 
protect vessels and people from the hazards associated with fireworks 
displays. This safety zone will restrict vessel traffic from a portion 
of the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan Zone.

DATES: Enforced from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. on September 30, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LCDR Bannan, Prevention Department, 
Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 747-7154.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the Safety 
Zone, Navy Pier East, Chicago Harbor, Chicago, IL, 33 CFR 165.933 for 
the following event:
    Bridgestone Conference on September 30, 2008 from 8 p.m. through 10 
p.m.
    All vessels must obtain permission from the Captain of the Port or 
his designated representative to enter, move within or exit the safety 
zone. Vessels and persons granted permission to enter the safety zone 
shall obey all lawful orders or directions of the Captain of the Port 
or a designated representative. While within the safety zone, all 
vessels shall operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe 
course.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.933 Safety 
Zone, Navy Pier East, Chicago Harbor, Chicago, IL and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). 
In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard 
will provide the maritime community with advance notification of these 
enforcement periods via broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local Notice 
to Mariners.
    The Captain of the Port or his designated representative will issue 
a Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying the public if enforcement of 
the safety zone established by this section is suspended. The Captain 
of the Port or his designated representative may be contacted via U.S. 
Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan on channel 16, VHF-FM.

    Dated: August 8, 2008.
Bruce C. Jones,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. E8-20363 Filed 9-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Swordfish Financial, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ending June 30, 2015, I, Ronald Vega, Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1.

Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2015, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2015, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated:   September 23, 2015

Swordfish Financial, Inc.



By: /s/ Ronald Vega

Ronald Vega
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 3, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51527-51528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20345]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-62,191]


Kurdziel Iron of Rothbury, Inc., Currently Known as Carlton Creek 
Ironworks, LLC, Including On-Site Leased Workers of Employment Giant 
Formerly Known as Select Employment, Rothbury, MI; Amended 
Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as 
amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification Regarding 
Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative 
Trade Adjustment Assistance on November 1, 2007, applicable to workers 
of Kurdziel Iron of Rothbury, Inc., including on-site leased workers of 
Employment Giant, formerly known as Select Employment, Rothbury, 
Michigan. The notice was published in the Federal Register on November 
15, 2007 (72 FR 64246).

[[Page 51528]]

    At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged 
in the production of iron foundry counterweights and machine bases.
    New information shows that on July 11, 2008, Monomoy Capital 
Partners purchased the assets of Kurdziel Iron of Rothbury, Inc. and is 
currently known as Carlton Creek Ironworks, LLC, Rothbury, Michigan. 
Workers wages at the subject firm are being reported under the 
Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax account for Carlton Creek Ironworks, 
LLC.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to 
include workers of the subject firm whose UI wages are reported under 
the successor firm, Carlton Creek Ironworks, LLC, Rothbury, Michigan.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-62,191 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Kurdziel Iron of Rothbury, Inc., currently known 
as Carlton Creek Ironworks, LLC, including on-site leased workers 
from Employment Giant, formerly known as Select Employment, 
Rothbury, Michigan, who became totally or partially separated from 
employment on or after September 20, 2006, through November 1, 2009, 
are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of 
the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for 
alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the 
Trade Act of 1974.

    Signed at Washington, DC this 25th day of August 2008.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-20345 Filed 9-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with this QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of The Pep Boys - Manny, Moe & Jack (the “Company”)for the quarterly period ending July 31, 2010, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),

 

I, Raymond L. Arthur, ExecutiveVice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

 

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

 

(ii)                                  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

 
| Date:  September 8,  2010 | by:                                                             | /s/ Raymond L. Arthur |
|-------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|
|                                | Raymond L. Arthur                                               |
|                                | Executive Vice President and  Chief Financial Officer           |
|                                | (Principal Financial Officer and  Principal Accounting Officer) |

 

1

----