alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
175 La. 412

#### W. L. PACE PIANO CO. v. LOUISIANA SEEBURG PIANO CO.

No. 27269.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 30, 1925.

Appeal Dismissed July 27, 1931.

Geo. J. Untereiner and F. R. Richardson, both of New Orleans, for appellant.

J. P. Sullivan, David Sessler and Arthur Landry, all of New Orleans, for appellee.

O’NIELL, C. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment rejecting the appellant’s demand and dismissing his suit to annul the appointment of a receiver for a concern which appellant was a member of. .There are also two appeals by opponents of the receiver’s final account, from the judgments dismissing their oppositions.

The appellees have moved to dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction ratione materise. They contend that the record does not show an amount in dispute exceeding $2,000. The record does show, though, that the value of the interest which the plaintiff in the action of nullity claimed in the concern which the receiver took charge of — and in the property which he took possession of as receiver — exceeded $2,000. That gives us jurisdiction of the appeal from the judgment dismissing the suit for nullity of the appointment of the receiver. And, as the fund to be distributed, according to the final account of the receiver, exceeds $2,000, we have jurisdiction also of the appeals from the judgments dismissing the oppositions to the account. Const. 1921, art. 7, § 10, subd. 3.

The appellees urge other causes for asking for a dismissal of the appeals, which causes, if well founded, would warrant our affirming the judgments appealed from. Stated broadly, the causes are (1) that the appellants have no interest in the appeals because as plaintiffs they had no right or cause o.f action; (2) that the judgment appointing the receiver is res judicata; and (3) that the appellants are estopped to question the validity or finality of the appointment of the receiver because they acquiesced in it. These exceptions of no cause or right of action and pleas of res judicata and estoppel were filed in the district court, and were, in terms, sustained by the judgments appealed from. We could not dismiss the appeals for those causes without thereby affirming the judgments appealed from. All of which matters will be considered when we take up the case on its merits.

The motion to dismiss the appeals is overruled.

On July 27,1931, this appeal was dismissed on joint motion of counsel in the cause.
EXHIBIT 12
                                                                      Page 1

                          PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY

                 CONSOLIDATED RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES


                                                            Three Months Ended
                                                                March 31,
                                                         ---------------------
                                                           2002         2001
                                                          ------       ------
                                                        (Restated)
                                                             (In thousands)

EARNINGS AS DEFINED IN REGULATION S-K:
  Income/(Loss) before extraordinary items...........   $18,839  |  $(2,105)
  Add-                                                           |
   Interest and other charges, before reduction for              |
     amounts capitalized and deferred interest income    10,861  |   11,651
   Provision for income taxes........................    13,463  |   (2,756)
   Interest element of rentals charged to income (a).       318  |      769
                                                        -------  |   -------
                                                                 |
     Earnings as defined.............................   $43,481  |   $7,559
                                                        =======  |   ======
                                                                 |
FIXED CHARGES AS DEFINED IN REGULATION S-K:                      |
  Interest on long-term debt.........................    $8,421  |   $8,241
  Other interest expense.............................       605  |    1,575
  Subsidiary's preferred stock dividend requirements.     1,835  |    1,835
  Interest element of rentals charged to income (a)..       318  |      769
                                                        -------  |  -------
                                                                 |
     Fixed charges as defined........................   $11,179  |  $12,420
                                                        =======  |  =======
                                                                 |
CONSOLIDATED RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES (b)..       3.89 |     0.61
                                                        ========    =======


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

(a) Includes the interest element of rentals calculated at 1/3 of rental expense
    as no readily defined interest element can be determined.

(b) For the three month period ended March 31, 2001,  Penelec's pre-tax earnings
    were  inadequate to cover its fixed  charges for the same period. The amount
    of such earnings deficiency for March 31, 2001 was $4.9 million pre-tax.

                                       87
| 9601 AMBERGLEN BLVD., SUITE 117 |         | 306 WEST SEVENTH STREET, SUITE 302 |         | 1000 LOUISIANA STREET, SUITE 625 |
|---------------------------------|--------------|------------------------------------|--------------|----------------------------------|
| AUSTIN, TEXAS 78729-1106        |         | FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102-4987       |         | HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002-5008        |
| 512-249-7000                    |         | 817-336-2461                       |         | 713-651-9944                     |
| FAX 512-233-2618                |    | FAX 817-877-3728                   |    | FAX 713-651-9980                 |

|   | Yours very truly,                                      |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                   |   |
|   |                                                   | /s/ W. TODD BROOKER |
|   | W. Todd Brooker, P.E.                                  |
|   | Vice PresidentCAWLEY, GILLESPIE & ASSOCIATES, INC. |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6614 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.6614

                    One Hundred Seventeenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
          the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-two

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
   4744 Grand River Avenue in Detroit, Michigan, as the ``Rosa Louise 
                 McCauley Parks Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ROSA LOUISE MCCAULEY PARKS POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 4744 Grand River Avenue in Detroit, Michigan, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Rosa Louise McCauley Parks Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Rosa 
Louise McCauley Parks Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER>                    1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                       JUN-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                       PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>            4,838
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>            555
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>               1,777
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>             5,972
<OTHER-ASSETS>                         205
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      13,347
<COMMON>                             2,109
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                1
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                   (423)
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>       1,687
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   93
<PREFERRED>                            138
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                 6,092
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                       0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>         226
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>          146
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>              1
<LEASES-CURRENT>                         0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>       4,964
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>       13,347
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>            2,451
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                   139
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>           1,827
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>           1,966
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                485
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                     (47)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>         438
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>               203
<NET-INCOME>                           211
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>              7
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>          204
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>               103
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>              188
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                 252
<EPS-BASIC>                          .98
<EPS-DILUTED>                          .98


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6854

DANI DALAL,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

GARY D. MAYNARD, Director of SCDC; CHARLES

CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South

Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge.

(CA-02-1160-20-BH)

Submitted: August 14, 2003 Decided: August 22, 2003

Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dani Dalal, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III, OFFICE OF

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,

for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Dani Dalal seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting

the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief on his

petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be

taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct.

1029, 1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S.

941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Dalal has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense

with 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. 

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.1  CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)   Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Intelligent Buying, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:  The annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 (the "Form 10-K") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Date: March 30, 2009  /s/ Eugene Malobrodsky  Eugene Malobrodsky Principal Executive Officer   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to INTELLIGENT BUYING, INC. and will be retained by INTELLIGENT BUYING, INC. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.12(b)    
    


Confidential Materials omitted and filed separately with the

Securities and Exchange Commission. Asterisks denote omissions.  


Millennium
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

40 Landsdowne Street

Cambridge

Massachusetts

USA 


Date:
28-02-2005 


Dear
Sirs 


We
refer to the License, Development and Commercialisation Agreement between us dated 22 June, 2004 ("the Agreement") and in particular to Clause 8.1 (b) (i) of the Agreement. The
capitalized terms used in this Letter, which are defined in the Agreement, will have the meanings given to them in the Agreement. 


Notwithstanding
the fact that the Transition Activities and Processes have not yet been completed by Millennium, the parties have agreed that GSK will pay to Millennium the milestone payment of
nineteen million nine hundred thousand dollars (USD $19,900,000) referred to in Clause 8.1 (b) (i), given the fact that: 



	(i)
	the
Agreement is in full force and effect on and after January 1st, 2005;



	(ii)
	the
CMA has transferred to GSK; and



	(iii)
	GSK
has achieved [**] dollars of gross sales of the Licensed Product in the Territory. 




Such
payment will be made by GSK within thirty (30) days of receipt by GSK of an invoice for the said amount from Millennium. 


Millennium
specifically hereby agrees to continue to ensure that the Transition Activities and Processes will be completed in accordance with the terms of the Agreement to the extent that they have
not been completed at the date of signing this letter and that payment of the sum nineteen million nine hundred thousand dollars (USD $19,900,000) in accordance with the above shall not relieve it of
any of its obligations in this respect. 


Please
confirm your consent to the above by signing and returning the enclosed duplicate copy of this letter initially by fax to Mary Kerr (Fax number +44 (0) 208 047 6958) and Lawrence DeGraaf
(Fax number 919 5499074) and thereafter in hard copy form to Lawrence DeGraaf at GlaxoSmithKline, 5 Moore Drive, PO Box 13398, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-3398. 



Yours
faithfully 


For

GLAXO GROUP LIMITED 


/s/
Mary Kerr    28/2/05 


Mary
Kerr

VP Critical Care Business Unit, Pharma Europe, GlaxoSmithKline 


Agreed
and accepted

/s/ Arthur J. Hiller 4/3/05

Arthur J. Hiller, SVP

For MILLENNIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC 











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.12(b)
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 172 (Thursday, September 4, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 51621]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20446]


========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 172 / Thursday, September 4, 2008 / 
Notices

[[Page 51621]]



AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION


Board of Directors Meeting

    Time: Tuesday, September 30, 2008, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.
    Place: African Development Foundation, Conference Room, 1400 I 
Street, NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20005.
    Date: Tuesday, September 30, 2008.
    Status:
    1. Open session, Tuesday, September 30, 2008, 9 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.; 
and
    2. Closed session, Tuesday, September 30, 2008, 11 a.m. to 4 p.m.
    Due to security requirements and limited seating, all individuals 
wishing to attend the open session of the meeting must notify Doris 
Martin, General Counsel, at (202) 673-3916 or Michele M. Rivard at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#610c1308170013052114120005074f060e17"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d9b4abb0afb8abbd99acaab8bdbff7beb6af">[email protected]</span></a> of your request to attend by 5 p.m. on Tuesday, 
September 23, 2008.

Lloyd O. Pierson,
President.
[FR Doc. E8-20446 Filed 9-3-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6117-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6815 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to limit the ability to assess a 

fee for health care services for prisoners, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 22, 2022 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to limit the ability 

to assess a fee for health care services for prisoners, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Bureau of 

5 Prisons Medical Care Act of 2022’’. 

6 SEC. 2. NO FEE FOR HEALTH CARE SERVICES FOR PRIS7 ONERS. 

8 Section 4048 of title 18, United States Code, is 

9 amended— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6815 IH

1 (1) by amending subsection (b) to read as fol2 lows: 

3 ‘‘(b) FEES FOR HEALTH CARE SERVICES.—In the 

4 case of health care services provided to a prisoner in con5 nection with a health care visit that results from an injury 

6 inflicted on a prisoner by another prisoner, the Director, 

7 in accordance with this section and with such regulations 

8 as the Director shall promulgate to carry out this section, 

9 may assess and collect a fee in connection with each such 

10 health care visit, from the account of the prisoner who 

11 inflicted the injury, as determined by the Director.’’; 

12 (2) by striking subsection (c); and 

13 (3) in subsection (e), by striking ‘‘or whether 

14 the prisoner qualifies under an exclusion under this 

15 section’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6948 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6948

 To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through 
   the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, to promulgate rules to update 
certain regulations relating to human cells, tissues, and cellular and 
             tissue-based products, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 7, 2022

  Mr. Crenshaw (for himself and Mr. Burgess) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through 
   the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, to promulgate rules to update 
certain regulations relating to human cells, tissues, and cellular and 
             tissue-based products, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. UPDATING CERTAIN REGULATIONS RELATING TO HUMAN CELLS, 
              TISSUES, AND CELLULAR AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting 
through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, shall update the 
regulations in part 1271 of title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (as 
in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act), including such 
revisions as may be necessary to update the definition of the term 
``minimal manipulation'' specified in section 1271.3 of title 21, Code 
of Federal Regulations (as in effect on such date of enactment).
    (b) Timeline.--The Secretary shall--
            (1) issue proposed regulations to carry out the updates 
        required under subsection (a) not later than 1 year after the 
        date of the enactment of this Act; and
            (2) finalize such proposed regulations not later than 1 
        year after the date on which such proposed regulations are 
        issued.
                                 <all>
```
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

December 27, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

128754 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 128754 

 COA: 252557 

Oakland CC: 2002-186168-FC 

JEFFREY ALLEN NYE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 14, 2005 

judgment 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. 

t1219 

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. 

December 27, 2005 

Clerk
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY (the Company), hereby certifies, to such
officers knowledge, that the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                 |  |                            
|---------------- |  | ---------------------------
|                 |  | /s/ Jeffrey D. Serkes      
|                 |  | Jeffrey D. Serkes          
|November 4, 2004 |  | Principal Financial Officer