alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Monarch Lodge No. 45 of the Improved, Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of the World, Plaintiff, *v.*City of New York, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

July 1,1953.

*Philip Watson*for plaintiff.

*Denis M.*Hurley, *Corporation Counsel (Stanley Buchsbaum*and *Solomon Portnow*of counsel), for defendant.

Thomas L. J. Corcoran, J.

In this action for a declaratory judgment, the plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and the defendant’s cross motion for judgment on the pleadings and for summary judgment will be considered together.

The plaintiff claims that it is entitled to exemption from the New York City Sales Tax under the following provisions of section N41-2.0 of the Administrative Code, as amended by Local Law No. 71 of City of New York of the Local Laws of 1952:

“ b. Any transaction by or with the following shall not be subject to tax hereunder:

*“*4. Any corporation, or association, or trust, or community chest, fund or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, or educational purposes ”.

The plaintiff’s certificate of incorporation is made part of the complaint. The particular objects for which the corporation was formed are stated to be “ benevolent, social and altruistic — to promote and encourage manly friendship and kindly intercourse, to aid, protect and assist its members and their families by voluntary contributions.”

It is apparent from the certificate of incorporation that at least some of the declared objects and purposes of the plaintiff are fraternal and social. They certainly are not exclusively *415religious, charitable or educational purposes. *(Matter of Emil Hubsch Post,*278 App. Div. 460, affd. 303 N. Y. 682.)

On the pleadings alone, the defendant is entitled to judgment.

It is equally apparent from the documentary evidence submitted by the defendant on the cross motion for summary judgment that the plaintiff is not *operated*exclusively for religious, charitable, or educational purposes, as required by the exemption statute. The plaintiff maintains for its members meeting rooms, offices and various other rooms, as well as a kitchen, dining room, barroom, and lounge. The plaintiff’s gross income for the year 1952 was $77,832.76. Of this amount, $56,263.67 came from the bar and restaurant alone. Plaintiff’s other income came from membership dues (which are a very small proportion of the total gross income), sales of drinks, banquets, dances, boat rides and other operations.

The plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied. The defendant’s cross motions are both granted and a declaratory judgment will be directed in its favor. Settle order.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                      17,558,331
<SECURITIES>                                51,811,365<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                               14,102,293
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            83,471,989
<PP&E>                                       7,706,345<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,267,437
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              88,910,897
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,213,047<F3>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        94,274
<OTHER-SE>                                  81,603,576
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                88,910,897
<SALES>                                     40,455,143
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            40,455,143
<CGS>                                       28,586,361
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,868,782
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,876,869
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              96,587
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,895,326
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,182,498
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 464,555
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,177,383
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.45
<FN>
<F1> Includes Marketable Securities @ $49,966,000, prepaid expenses @ $190,075
     and Income Taxes Rec. @ $1,655,290
<F2> Includes PP&E @ $4,471,838 + S/W dev. Costs @ $3,188,783 + Misc.
     deposits @ $45,724
<F3> Includes Capital Leases Payable/Long-Term @ $259,951
</FN>


</TABLE>
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential.


# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

LEXMARK INTERNATIONA L, INC., Plaintiff

- Cross

- Appellant

v.

IMPRESSION PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant

- Appellant

QUALITY CARTRIDGES, INC., JOHN DOES, 1

- 20, BLUE TRADING LLC, EXPRINT INTERNATIONAL, INC., LD PRODUCTS, I NC., PRINTRONIC CORPORATION, TESEN D EVELOPMENT (HONG KONG) CO. LTD., BENIGNO ADEVA AND HIS COMPANIES, De fendants

______________________

2014

- 1617, 2014

- 1619

______________________
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio in No. 1:10

- cv

- 00564

- MRB, Judge Michael R. Barrett.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________LEXMARK INTERNATIONA L
, INC

. v. IMPRESSION PRODUCTS
, INC

. 2

P ER C URIAM

. O R D E R

Amici C uriae Biotechnology Industry Organization and CropLife International move unopposed to participate in the oral argument scheduled for October 2, 2015 and to expedite the decision or ruling on the motion to allow argument.
Upon consideration thereof,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

The motion s are granted. Amici C uriae, Biotechnology Industry Organization , et al. is allotted 5 minutes of the 30 minutes previously allotted to Lexmark International, Inc. Counsel for the amici curiae should docket the R esponse to Oral Argument Order event, by 3:00 p.m. Thursday , September 24, 2015 advising the court of the name of the attorney who will prese nt its argument.

F OR THE C OURT

September 24 , 2015 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

HONORABLE MARCIA S. KRIEGER

Courtroom Deputy: Patricia Glover Date: August 3, 2012

Court Reporter: Terri Lindblom

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00355-MSK

Parties: Counsel Appearing:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

WUANITA WEINGART,

JOHN PHILLIP GALLEGOS,

ALOIS WEINGART,

Defendants.

Linda Kaufman

Martha Paluch

Martin Stuart

Darlene Bagley

William Taylor

Paula Ray

COURTROOM MINUTES

HEARING: Motions

10:06 a.m. Court in session.

Defendants present on bond.

The Court addresses Motion for Disclosure of 404(b) Evidence (Doc. #100)

Argument.

ORDER: Motion for Disclosure of 404(b) Evidence (Doc. #100) is DENIED.

The Court addresses Motion to Sever (Doc. #71) and Motion to Withdraw Document (Doc.

#113)

Case 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 118 Filed 08/03/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Courtroom Minutes

Judge Marcia S. Krieger

Page 2

ORDER: Motion to Sever (Doc. #71) is WITHDRAWN; Motion to Withdraw Document

(Doc. #113) is GRANTED.

The Court addresses the current trial setting and other questions by counsel.

ORDER: Bond is continued.

10:31 a.m. Court in recess.

Total Time: 25 minutes.

Hearing concluded.

Case 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 118 Filed 08/03/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the filing of HomeLife, Inc.'s (the "Company") Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended February 28, 2006, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marie
M. May, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

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

(2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.

                                        /s/ Marie M. May
                                        ----------------
                                        Marie M. May
                                        Chief Financial Officer

Date: April 19, 2006
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01747-RPM

MAISHA POLLARD,

Plaintiff,

v.

DENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITAL AUTHORITY and

PETER CRUM, M.D., 

Defendants.

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL AS TO DEFENDANT PETER CRUM, M.D.

 

In the third and fourth claims for relief alleged in the plaintiff’s complaint, filed July 4,

2011, the plaintiff alleges breaches of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, C.R.S. § § 24-34-

401, et seq., by her employer, Denver Health and Hospital Authority and her supervisor Peter

Crum, M.D., in the termination of her employment. Peter Crum, M.D., filed a motion to dismiss

on November 4, 2011, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim for relief

against him. The plaintiff responded and the defendant Peter Crum, M.D., replied. The papers

filed by the parties contain a dispute concerning the correct interpretation of the Colorado

statute as to whether an employee of an employer may have liability. There is no direct

Colorado precedent for this Court to follow on that issue. What is clear is that the Tenth Circuit

Court of Appeals in Rodriguez v. Wet Ink, LLC, 603 F.3d 810, 814 (10th Cir. 2010) analyzed the

work sharing agreement between the Colorado Civil Rights Division and the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission as precluding the authority of either agency to determine the

jurisdiction of the other with respect to the issuance of a notice of right to sue letter, thereby

Case 1:11-cv-01747-RPM Document 9 Filed 12/02/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

terminating administrative jurisdiction. The plaintiff has not addressed that case in her

opposition. Because the complaint fails to allege that the CCRD has issued a notice of right to

sue letter to Maisha Pollard, and even fails to allege that any charge of discrimination was filed

as to Defendant Peter Crum, M.D., the claims against this defendant have failed to allege a

necessary condition to bringing this action against him. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that this civil action is dismissed as to the Defendant Peter Crum, M.D.

Dated: December 2nd, 2011

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

________________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-01747-RPM Document 9 Filed 12/02/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
Exhibit
      31.2




FORM
      OF
      CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT
      TO RULE 13a-14 AND 15d-14


UNDER
      THE
      SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED





CERTIFICATION





I,
      Brian
      Harcourt, certify that:




1. I
      have
      reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of National Healthcare Technology,
      Inc.;




2. Based
      on
      my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of
      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 quarterly
      report;




3. Based
      on
      my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
      in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;




4. The
      registrant’s other certifying officer and I am responsible for establishing and
      maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
      Rules
      13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:




(a) designed
      such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;




(b) evaluated
      the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a
      date within 90 days of the filing date of this quarterly report (the “Evaluation
      Date”); and




(c) presented
      in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
      disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation
      Date;




5. The
      registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
      recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the
      registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
      functions):




(a) all
      significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which
      could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize,
      and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any
      material weaknesses in internal controls; and




(b) any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
      who
      have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls.







Date:
        February 1, 2006





/s/
      BRIAN
      HARCOURT


Name:
      Brian Harcourt


Title:
      CFO
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of iGATE Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Sujit Sircar, Chief Financial 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 my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/S/    SUJIT
SIRCAR                 
|Sujit Sircar
Chief Financial Officer

Date: July 28, 2010
Exhibit 32.2





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


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Value Line, Inc. (the “Company”), for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2011 (the “Report”), I, John A. McKay, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, as of the date hereof, to my knowledge:





1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”); and





2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods presented.




This Certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Act and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed to be “filed’ under the Exchange Act.  This Certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.





Date:  July 29, 2011
By:   s/ John A. McKayJohn A. McKayChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2115

To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities

Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the

design, planning, and construction of a project to reclaim and reuse

wastewater within and outside of the service area of the Lakehaven

Utility District, Washington.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 7, 2001

Mr. SMITH of Washington introduced the following bill; which was referred to

the Committee on Resources

A BILL

To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater

Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of

the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and

construction of a project to reclaim and reuse wastewater

within and outside of the service area of the Lakehaven

Utility District, Washington.

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

3 SECTION 1. LAKEHAVEN, WASHINGTON, WASTEWATER REC4 LAMATION AND REUSE PROJECT.

5 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Reclamation Wastewater

6 and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (Public Law
2

•HR 2115 IH

1 102–575, title XVI; 43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.) is amended

2 by adding at the end the following:

3 ‘‘SEC. 1635. LAKEHAVEN, WASHINGTON, WATER RECLAMA4 TION AND REUSE PROJECT.

5 ‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary, in coopera6 tion with the Lakehaven Utility District, Washington, is

7 authorized to participate in the design, planning, and con8 struction of, and land acquisition for, a project to reclaim

9 and reuse wastewater, including degraded groundwaters,

10 within and outside of the service area of the Lakehaven

11 Utility District.

12 ‘‘(b) COST SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost

13 of the project authorized by this section shall not exceed

14 25 percent of the total cost of the project.

15 ‘‘(c) LIMITATION.—The Secretary shall not provide

16 funds for the operation and maintenance of the project

17 authorized by this section.’’.

18 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

19 in section 2 of such Act is amended by inserting after the

20 item relating to section 1634 the following:

‘‘Sec. 1635. Lakehaven, Washington, Water Reclamation and Reuse

Project.’’.

Æ
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**Certification
      Pursuant To**


**Section
      906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





I,
      John
      Lackland, Chief Financial Officer of Power Efficiency Corporation, certify,
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350, that:





|1. | the
              Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended
              March
              31, 2008 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
              13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (U.S.C. 78m or
              78o(d)); and
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




|2. | the
              information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
              respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
              Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Date:
      May
      15, 2008





BY:  /s/
      John Lackland


John
      Lackland


Chief
      Financial Officer




The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely 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) and is not being filed as part of a separate
      disclosure document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
PARTNERSHIP'S STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND BALANCE SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         182,829
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,400,433
<PP&E>                                      32,370,981
<DEPRECIATION>                              14,578,208
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,193,206
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          338,702
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,090,120
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,193,206
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,359,384
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,770,254
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,394,973
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (805,843)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (805,843)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (805,843)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:11-cv-02252-CMA Document 9 Filed 10/12/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3
Case 1:11-cv-02252-CMA Document 9 Filed 10/12/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3
Case 1:11-cv-02252-CMA Document 9 Filed 10/12/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3