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

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM                        .                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Postal Service notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add Priority Mail Contract 1 to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3).

# DATES:

October 16, 2008.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scott Reiter, 202-268-2999

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that on September 23, 2008, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract to Competitive Product List and Notice of Establishment of Rates and Class Not Of General Applicability.*                     Documents are available at                     *http://www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2008-8, CP2008-26.                

Neva R. Watson,

Attorney, Legislative.

[FR Doc. E8-24536 Filed 10-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02766-RPM 

EVELYN KING-BURRELL, as personal representative of the 

Estate of Rickey W. Burrell a/k/a Rickey Wayne Burrell, 

Plaintiff, 

v.

CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO, 

Defendant. 

____________________________________________________________________________

ORDER FOR DISMISSAL

____________________________________________________________________________

 Pursuant to the Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice [46] filed January 23, 2013, it is

ORDERED that this civil action is dismissed with prejudice, each party to bear their own

costs and attorneys fees.

DATED this 24th day of January, 2013

BY THE COURT: 

s/Richard P. Matsch

_________________________________ 

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch 

Case 1:11-cv-02766-RPM Document 48 Filed 01/24/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
#### Peggy J. WOLFE, Appellant, v. W. S. WOLFE, Appellee.

No. 4494.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Eastland.

Dec. 10, 1971.

*567Jack Placke, Simmang & Placke, Gid-dings, for appellant.

Arthur Mitchell, Mitchell, Gilbert & McLean, Austin, for appellee.

McCLOUD, Chief Justice.

This is a venue case. W. S. Wolfe filed suit in Erath County against Nickles S. Wolfe and Peggy J. Wolfe. The defendants were formerly husband and wife. Plaintiff alleged that the defendants acting jointly and severally by conspiracy and unlawful agreement undertook to and in fact did appropriate and fraudulently convert his commercial business known as Crescent Construction Company. The alleged conspiracy involved the forging of certain documents.

Peggy J. Wolfe filed a plea of privilege seeking to have the suit against her transferred to Lee County, her place of residence. Plaintiff, W. S. Wolfe, filed a controverting plea alleging that venue was proper under Subdivisions 4, 7, and 9, of Article 1995, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St.

The trial court overruled the plea of privilege and Peggy J. Wolfe appeals. We affirm and hold that venue may be maintained in Erath County under Subdivision 4.

No findings of fact or conclusions of law were requested or filed. Therefore the judgment of the trial court implies all necessary fact findings in support of the judgment and in seeking to determine whether there is any evidence to support the judgment, and the implied findings of fact incident thereto, it is proper to consider only that evidence most favorable to the issue and to disregard that which is opposed to it. Renfro Drug Company v. Lewis, 149 Tex. 507, 235 S.W.2d 609 (1950).

The venue facts under Subdivision 4 are: (1) one defendant resides in the county of suit; (2) the party asserting his privilege is at least a proper party to the claim against the resident defendant; and (3) the plaintiff has a bona fide claim against the resident defendant. Stockyards National Bank v. Maples, 127 Tex. 633, 95 S.W.2d 1300 (Tex.Com.App.1936); McDonald, Texas Civil Practice, Vol. 1, p. 434, Venue, Sec. 4.10.2.

Appellant in her first point of error contends the trial court erred because “the record reflects no cause of action against Defendant, Nickles S. Wolfe, a resident of Erath County, Texas”. We disagree.

The record contains evidence that Nickles S. Wolfe was a resident of Erath County; that he transferred property belonging to Crescent Construction Company to appellant without the knowledge of ap-pellee; that he forged appellee’s name to a document which recited that appellee was no longer connected with or interested in Crescent Construction Company and that appellee had disposed of his interest in such business to appellant Peggy J. Wolfe.

We have considered all of appellant’s points of error and all are overruled. The judgment is affirme'd.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02337-REB-MJW

TYRON DUANTE SMALL,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

JOHN DOE DETECTIVE ONE, and

JOHN DOE OFFICER TWO,

Defendant(s).

MINUTE ORDER 

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that the plaintiff’s “Requesting the Ammended [sic]

complaint packet, and an [sic] week of extention [sic] from the date receiveing [sic]

request” (Docket No. 38) and “Notice Court Clerk Added Party to Complaint” (Docket

No. 40) are granted to the extent that the Clerk of Court shall send a Prisoner Complaint

Packet to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff shall have up to and including May 25, 2012, to

file his proposed Third Amended Complaint.

Date: May 10, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02337-MJW Document 42 Filed 05/10/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 20-0082

_________________

CITY OF BILLINGS,

 Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

KATRINA LYNN HOFMAN,

 Defendant and Appellant,

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the 

Honorable Mary Jane Knisely, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 4 2021

08/04/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0082
#### ROSS v. TUCKER (two cases).

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
EXHIBIT 23.1



LOGO

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM We consent to the incorporation by reference in Amendment No. 3 to Registration
Statement Nos. 333-209738 and 333-209738-01 of First National Master Note Trust and First National Funding LLC on Form SF-3 of our reports dated March 30, 2017, relating to the Report on Assessment of Compliance with Servicing Criteria Pursuant to
Item 1122 of Regulation AB for First National Bank of Omaha, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of First National Master Note Trust and First National Funding LLC for the year ended December 31, 2016. Omaha, Nebraska March 30, 2017
**Exhibit 32**

 

CERTIFICATIONOF CEO AND CFOPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned certifies that thisQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the informationcontained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of Cyanotech Corporation.

 

 
| Date:    | February 11, 2010 |     | /s/ Andrew H.  Jacobson                                                              |
|----------|------------------------|----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|     |                   |     | Andrew H.  Jacobson                                                                  |
| * * | * *               | * * | *President  and Chief Executive Officer*                                             |
|     |                   |     |                                                                                 |
|     |                   |     |                                                                                 |
| Date:    | February 11, 2010 |     | /s/ Deanna L.  Spooner                                                               |
|     |                   |     | Deanna L.  Spooner                                                                   |
| * * | * *               | * * | *Vice  President — Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             478
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,399
<ALLOWANCES>                                       271
<INVENTORY>                                      2,702
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                15,577
<PP&E>                                          89,205
<DEPRECIATION>                                  48,418
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  68,686
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,207
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           467
<OTHER-SE>                                      49,856
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    68,686
<SALES>                                          6,170
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,490
<CGS>                                            4,320
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,145
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   255
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  56
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,621
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,899
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,396
<DISCONTINUED>                                     326
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,722
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .58
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT  32

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

     I,  Michael  S.  Pagnano,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of 2002, that
the Annual Report  of  The World Golf League, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal
year  ended  December  31,  2005,  fully  complies  with  the  requirements  of
Section  13(a)  or  15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934 and that
information contained in such  Form  10-KSB  fairly  presents  in  all  material
respects  the  financial condition  and  results  of  operations  of  The  World
Golf  League,  Inc.

Date:  April 21,  2006

                                       By:  /s/  Michael  S.  Pagnano
                                            ---------------------------
                                            Michael  S.  Pagnano
                                            Chief Executive Officer and
                                            Chief Financial Officer

<PAGE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Robert L. Bailey hereby certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in my capacity as an officer of PMC-Sierra, Inc. (PMC), that, to my knowledge, this Quarterly Report of PMC on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 1, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PMC.



|      |  |                |  |  |  |     |  |                                      
|----- |  | -------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|      |  |                |  | 
|Date: |  | August 9, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Robert L. Bailey                 
|      |  |                |  |  |  |     |  | Robert L. Bailey                     
|      |  |                |  |  |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
#### POLLITT v. HALL.*

No. 6919.

United States Court of Appeals for District of Columbia.

Argued Oct. 20, 1937.

Decided Nov. 15, 1937.

Basil H. Pollitt, of Newark, N. J., pro se.

Leslie C. Garnett, U. S. Atty., Allen J. Krouse, Asst. U. S. Atty., Elwood H. Seal, Corp. Counsel, D. C., and T. Gillespie Walsh, Asst. Corp. Counsel, D. C., all of Washington, D. C., for appellee.

Before ROBB, GRONER, and MILLER, Associate Justices.

*

Writ of certiorari denied 58 S.Ct. 849, 82 L.Ed. —.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner (appellant), who is a lawyer, was in June, 1935, adjudged in a lunacy proceeding in the District Court to be of unsound mind and subject to detention and treatment. He has since been detained in St. Elizabeths Hospital. In January of 1937 he filed a petition for habeas corpus. The writ issued and the cause was heard January 15, *1937,*the writ discharged, and petitioner remanded to the custody of the superintendent of the hospital. On January 26th a motion for rehearing was denied. Petitioner has appealed to this court and in his brief and argument insists that he is sane and able to attend to his own business and should be discharged. The record here consists of the petition, the return of the superintendent of the hospital, the order of the court, the motion for rehearing, the order denying same, and the order allowing the appeal. The testimony introduced in the court below is not included in the record, and the only assignments of error are those to be found in the motion for rehearing. These we have noticed as fully as though they were formally assigned. The return shows that petitioner is of unsound mind, suffering from psychosis (paranoid type) with encephalitis lethargica (epidemic encephalitis) and that he should receive further care and treatment in a mental hospital. There is nothing in the record to the contrary save the statement of petitioner in his brief and in oral argument that he is as sound mentally as other members of the legal profession, enjoys good health, and is financially able to take care of himself.

Petitioner in his motion for rehearing and again in his brief says that the hearing below was arbitrary, that the court refused to permit him to complete his testimony or to cross-examine the medical witnesses or to rebut their testimony. But nothing appears to support these charges. In short, if we are to do as petitioner asks, we should have to reach a favorable conclusion of petitioner’s mental condition without any evidence and despite the medical evidence to the contrary, which it appears was admitted and considered by the court below. This, of course, we have no right to do. In the circumstances no other action on our part is possible than to affirm the order dismissing the writ and remanding petitioner to the custody of the superintendent of the hospital.

Affirmed.
#### HORNE v. HORNE.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 (the "Report") of First
National Master Note Trust (the "Trust") for the year ended December 31, 2004,
I, Karlyn M. Knieriem, Treasurer of First National Funding Corporation as
managing member of First National Funding LLC as transferor and co-registrant,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge 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 Trust.

Dated: March 30, 2005             FIRST NATIONAL MASTER NOTE TRUST

                                  By: First National Funding LLC, as Transferor
                                      And Co-Registrant

                                  By: First National Funding Corporation,
                                      Managing Member

                                  By: /s/ Karlyn M. Knieriem
                                      ----------------------------------------
                                      Karlyn M. Knieriem, Treasurer

                                       21
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 24Holdings Inc. (the "Company")
on Form  10-QSB  for the  period  ending  September  30,  2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Arnold P. Kling, President
of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 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, as amended; and

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

Dated: October 11, 2007

/s/ Arnold P. Kling
--------------------------
Arnold P. Kling
President


A signed  original of this  certification  has been  provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and  furnished  to the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-10801 

Summary Calendar

__________________

GREGORY MONTGOMERY,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

OFFICE C/O PEARCE; OFFICER 

C/O 3 FOREE,

 Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:95-CV-24-C

- - - - - - - - - -

February 7, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHE’ and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Gregory Montgomery filed this appeal from the district

court's denial of his FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b) motion; nevertheless,

Montgomery has not briefed whether the district court abused its

discretion in denying the motion. Although this court liberally

construes pro se briefs, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520

(1972), this court requires arguments to be briefed in order to

be preserved. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 
No. 95-10801

-2-

1993). Claims not adequately argued in the body of the brief are

deemed abandoned on appeal. Id. at 224-25. As Montgomery has

abandoned the only appellate issue this court has jurisdiction to

address, the appeal is frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d

215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. Rule 42.2.

Montgomery is cautioned that any additional frivolous

appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To

avoid sanctions, Montgomery is further cautioned to review any

pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that

are frivolous because they have been previously decided by this

court. 

APPEAL DISMISSED.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1821 

To prohibit the closure or relocation of any county, local, or field office 

of the Farm Service Agency or Natural Resources Conservation Service 

or any office related to the rural development mission of the Department 

of Agriculture until at least 1 year after the enactment of an Act 

to provide for the continuation of agricultural programs after fiscal 

year 2007. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 19, 2007 

Mrs. CLINTON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To prohibit the closure or relocation of any county, local, 

or field office of the Farm Service Agency or Natural 

Resources Conservation Service or any office related to 

the rural development mission of the Department of Agriculture until at least 1 year after the enactment of 

an Act to provide for the continuation of agricultural 

programs after fiscal year 2007. 

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


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•S 1821 IS

1 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON CLOSURE OR RELOCATION 

2 OF CERTAIN COUNTY, LOCAL, AND FIELD OF3 FICES. 

4 The Secretary of Agriculture may not close or relo5 cate any county, local, or field office of the Farm Service 

6 Agency or Natural Resources Conservation Service or any 

7 office related to the rural development mission of the De8 partment of Agriculture until the date that is at least 1 

9 year after the date of the enactment of an Act to provide 

10 for the continuation of agricultural programs after fiscal 

11 year 2007. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of AppealsCAAP-12-000052611-OCT-201210:10 AM