alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6276
MARK AUBREY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusSTATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA JUSTICE COMMITTEE; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, T. TRAVIS MEDLOCK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-94-2500-3-18-BC) Submitted: July 10, 1997 Decided: July 23, 1997 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark Aubrey Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his Fed.R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. 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. Williams v. State of South Carolina Justice Comm. , No. CA-94-2500-3-18-BC (D.S.C. Feb. 5, 1997). 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.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 35**

**SERVICER’S ANNUAL CERTIFICATION**

**MECHANICS BANK**

**PURSUANT TOSECTION 4.10 OF THE SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT**

This Servicer’s Annual Certification is delivered pursuant to a saleand servicing agreement dated as of June 1, 2018 (the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and among, California Republic Auto Receivables Trust 2018-1, California Republic Funding, LLC, MechanicsBank, as Seller, Servicer, Administrator, Calculation Agent and Custodian (in such capacity, the “Servicer”), and U.S. Bank National Association, as indenture trustee (the “Indenture Trustee”). All capitalized terms used but notdefined herein shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Appendix A to the Sale and Servicing Agreement. 

The undersigned, aResponsible Officer of the Servicer, hereby certifies that: 

1.          A reviewof the activities of the Servicer and of the performance of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement during the period from June 1, 2018 to and including December 31, 2018 (the “Review Period”) was conducted undermy supervision. 

2.          To the best of my knowledge, based on such review,the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Review Period. 

[SIGNATURE APPEARS ON NEXT PAGE] 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, in my capacity as specified below, has caused thiscertificate to be executed as of the date indicated below. 

 

Dated: March 26, 2019
   /s/ Nathan J. Duda   Nathan J. Duda   Chief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Joseph M. LeDoux

v. Civil No. 06-cv-268-PB

Superintendent, Rockingham County

House of Corrections, et al.

O R D E R

Pro se plaintiff Joseph M. LeDoux has filed a complaint and

amendment thereto, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that

defendants have violated his rights under the First and

Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution (document

nos. 1 and 6). Seeking injunctive and monetary relief, he brings

this action against the Rockingham County House of Corrections

(“RCHOC”) and the following RCHOC employees: Superintendent

Albert Wright; Major Blomeke; Captain Steven Church; Sergeant

Horne; corrections officers Valencia, Sparks, Haywood and

Trainor; and an unnamed corrections officer.

The complaint is before me for preliminary review to

determine whether, among other things, it states a claim upon

which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; U.S.

District Court for the District of New Hampshire Local Rule

(“LR”) 4.3(d)(2). 

Case 1:06-cv-00268-PB Document 9 Filed 11/30/06 Page 1 of 3
2

For the reasons stated in the report and recommendation

issued simultaneously herewith, I find that LeDoux has alleged

the following claims: (1) First and Fourteenth Amendment denial

of access to the courts claims against Wright, Blomeke and

Church; (2) Fourteenth Amendment due process claims against

Haywood, Trainor, Horne, Wright, Blomeke and Church; and (3)

First and Fourteenth Amendment retaliation claims against

Haywood, Trainor, Wright and an unnamed corrections officer. I

recommend dismissal of all remaining claims.

With the exception of the unnamed corrections officer, 

LeDoux has filed all the necessary summons forms, therefore, I

order the complaint to be served on those defendants. The

Clerk’s office is directed to issue the necessary summons forms

and forward to the United States Marshal for the District of New

Hampshire (the “U.S. Marshal’s office”) the summonses and copies

of the complaint and amended complaint (document nos. 1 and 6),

the report and recommendation issued simultaneously with this

order, and this order. Upon receipt of the necessary

documentation, the U.S. Marshal’s office shall effect service

upon defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2). 

Defendants are instructed to answer or otherwise plead

Case 1:06-cv-00268-PB Document 9 Filed 11/30/06 Page 2 of 3
3

within twenty days of service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A). 

LeDoux is instructed that all future pleadings, written

motions, notices, or similar papers shall be served directly on

the defendants by delivering or mailing the materials to them or

their attorney(s), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b). 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: November 30, 2006

cc: Joseph M. LeDoux, pro se

Case 1:06-cv-00268-PB Document 9 Filed 11/30/06 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-121-01-PB

Christopher Aldrich

NOTICE OF RULING

Re: Document No. 40, Motion for Continuance and

Evaluation by Defense Expert

Ruling: The motion for evaluation by defense expert is

granted. The defendant shall submit a specific proposal for

consideration by the court identifying the defense expert and a

proposed budget. Defendant shall submit a separate motion for

continuance of the trial. 

Entered by: Paul Barbadoro, District Judge

Date: September 24, 2007

cc: Sven Wiberg, Esq.

Terry Ollila, AUSA

United States Marshal

United States Probation

Case 1:06-cr-00121-PB Document 41 Filed 09/24/07 Page 1 of 1
|Structure Data for U.S. Banking Offices of Foreign Entities

Structure and Share | 
About




December 2001


By Country
  By Type
  ASCIIHome | 
Banking Information and RegulationAccessibility | 
Contact us
Last update: June 30, 2008
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

# AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. 

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of Amspec Services LLC, as a commercial gauger and laboratory. 

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, Amspec Services LLC, 2841 Carolina Beach Rd. Suite 3B, Wilmington, NC 28412, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products and organic chemicals for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                         *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.*                         Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.                         *http://cbp.gov/​xp/​cgov/​import/​operations_​support/​labs_​scientific_​svcs/​commercial_​gaugers/​*.                     

# DATES:

The accreditation and approval of Amspec Services LLC, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on June 05, 2008. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for June 2011. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Randall Breaux, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, (202) 344-1060. 

Dated: September 16, 2008. 

Ira S. Reese, 

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services. 

[FR Doc. E8-22217 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. 05-cr-241- 03-JD

Virak Tim

O R D E R

The assented to motion to reschedule jury trial (document no.

210) filed by defendant is granted.

Defendant shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights within 10

days. The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting

a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the

defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. § 3131(h)(8)(B)(iv), for the

reasons set forth in the motion.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

Date: July 31, 2007

cc: Robert M. Kinsella 

James Dennehy

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:05-cr-00241-JD Document 214 Filed 07/31/07 Page 1 of 1
|Structure Data for U.S. Banking Offices of Foreign Entities

Structure and Share | 
About




March 1999


By Country
  By Type
  ASCIIHome | 
Banking Information and RegulationAccessibility | 
Contact us
Last update: June 30, 2008
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kuperman v. NH Department of Corrections, Commissioner et al Doc. 5

Dockets.Justia.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

William Hurlburt

v. Civil No. 05-cv-203-PB

Northern NH Correctional Facility,

Chaplin, et al

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On March 8, 2006, the parties in the above-captioned case

appeared before the Court for an evidentiary hearing on Plaintiff

William Hurlburt’s request for a preliminary injunction requiring

the Defendants to permit Plaintiff to grow a beard in accordance

with his desire to satisfy a requirement of his sincerely-held

religious beliefs. After the close of the Plaintiff’s evidence,

the parties voluntarily entered into the following stipulations:

1. The New Hampshire Department of Corrections agrees

to provide William Hurlburt a shaving pass for a period

of one year, more or less, to enable him to have a 1/4

inch beard in accordance with Plaintiff’s sincerelyheld religious belief and desire to adhere to the

Nazarite Vow; and

2. The parties agree that this case is terminated.

In accordance with the foregoing stipulations, which were

made on the record during the evidentiary hearing, I recommend

that this case be dismissed.

Case 1:05-cv-00203-PB Document 20 Filed 03/08/06 Page 1 of 2
2

Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be

filed within ten (10) days of receipt of this notice. Failure to

file objections within the specified time waives the right to

appeal the district court’s order. See Unauthorized Practice of

Law Comm. v. Gordon, 979 F.2d 11, 13-14 (1st Cir. 1992); United

States v. Valencia-Copete, 792 F.2d 4, 6 (1st Cir. 1986). 

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: March 8, 2006

cc: William Hurlburt, pro se

Daniel J. Mullen, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00203-PB Document 20 Filed 03/08/06 Page 2 of 2
Case 1 :06-mc-00044-S-LDA Document 26 Filed 07/19/2006 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAN D

GORDON C . REID, }

Plaintiff, }

v . ) MISC . No . 06-44 S

WARREN F . DOWALIBY ,

Superintendent, Straffor d

County Department of }

Corrections, et al . }

Defendants .

}

ORDER

The Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate

Judge Lincoln D . Almond filed on June 23, 2006, in the abovecaptioned matter is accepted pursuant to Title 28 United States

Code § 636(b)(1) . Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining

Order is DENIED .

By Orde r

ENTER :

Deputy Clerk

W

*

r 4

William E . Smith

United States District Judg e

Date : -7 I jg/D&

Case 1:06-cv-00182-SM Document 28 Filed 08/30/06 Page 1 of 1
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-17-00122-CV

IN RE CAROLYN BARNES

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Carolyn Barnes’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied. 

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and 

Justice Scoggins

Petition denied

Opinion delivered and filed April 19, 2017

[OT06]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7557
ANTHONY BERNARD PAGE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAPTAIN HOLLOWAY, Shift Commander; JACK LEE, Assistant Warden; D. TAYLOR, Chairman, ICC; D. SWISHER, Hearings Officer, Defendants - Appellees, and AUGUSTA CORRECTIONAL CENTER ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL, Defendants.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-529-R) Submitted: July 24, 1997 Decided: July 31, 1997 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 Anthony Bernard Page, Appellant Pro Se. Jill T heresa Bowers, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) 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. Page v. Holloway , No. CA-95-529-R (W.D. Va. Sept. 4, 1996). 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.

AFFIRMED
**
**Exhibit 35.1**

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2018-5 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021, (the “Report”), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Santander Consumer USA Inc. (the “Servicer”), does hereby certify andrepresent that: 

 
 1.
A review of the activities and performance of the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as ofNovember 20, 2018, among Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, Santander Consumer USA Inc., Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2018-5 and Wilmington Trust, National Association (the “Agreement”)during the period that is the subject of the Report has been made under my supervision. 

 
 2.
To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under theAgreement in all material respects throughout the period that is the subject of the Report. 

 
SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.
By:
 
/s/ Marc Womack

Name:
 
Marc Womack

Title:
 
EVP, Head of Operations

Date:
 
March 31, 2022

By:
 
/s/ Erik Laney

Name:
 
Erik Laney

Title:
 
Treasurer

Date:
 
March 31, 2022
**
Exhibit 31.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Certifications
--------------

I, David Weisman, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Eagle Broadband,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects,
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's fourth fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


Date:  March 30, 2004


/S/ David Weisman
------------------------
David Weisman,
Chief Executive Officer
#### Ahoto Taysir MULAZIM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 03-6560.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 14, 2003.

Decided Aug. 20, 2003.

Ahoto Taysir Mulazim, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Ahoto Taysir Mulazim seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief without prejudice on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. 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, 1039, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), *cert. denied,*534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Mulazim 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 *276materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
#### Lester DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

July 6, 1954.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 13, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

June 22, 2016

Order 

June 22, 2016

153082(28)

DEANNA D. MABRY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

JOHANNA SUZANNE-GRAINE MABRY,

Defendant-Appellee.

SC: 153082

COA: 329786

Washtenaw CC: 2015-001873-DC

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the joint motion of the Children’s Trauma 

Assessment Center, the Michigan Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers, 

and the Michigan League for Public Policy to participate as amicus curiae and file a brief 

in support of the application for leave to appeal is GRANTED. The amicus brief 

submitted on June 17, 2016, is accepted for filing.