alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0607 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ROBERT LARRY WOOD ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 21 , 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brie f on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 14 2021

06/14/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0607
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 1996 for Hallwood  Energy  Partners,  L.P. and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000768172
<NAME> HALLWOOD ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                          12,497
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,863
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,469
<PP&E>                                         603,820
<DEPRECIATION>                                 517,624
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 122,653
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,827
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      60,484
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   122,653
<SALES>                                         24,851
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,489
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,370
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   972
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,119
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,028
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,028
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,028
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .69
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.1        Officer's Certificate regarding Annual Statement of
                    Compliance of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp.

                   WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.
                              OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

     The undersigned officer of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp., a
Delaware corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies on behalf of the Company
and on his own behalf for purposes of the WAMU MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH
CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2002-AR5, as follows:

     1. I am the duly appointed, qualified and acting President of the Company.

     2. Capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings
ascribed to such terms in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement related to the
above-referenced series of Certificates.

     3. I am duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officer's Certificate
on behalf of the Company.

     4. A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year and performance under this Agreement has been made under my
supervision.

     5. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer
has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such year.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed my name as of March 15, 2004.





                   WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.


                     By: /s/ Michael L. Parker
                         Michael L. Parker,
                         President and Director
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-03-00591-CV

In the Best Interest and Protection of R. J. C.

FROM THE PROBATE COURT NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. 37900, HONORABLE GUY HERMAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

On September 22, 2003, R. J. C., pro se, filed a notice of appeal from the judgement

of the probate court. He subsequently neither paid for, or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s

record. By letter dated February 24, 2004, this Court informed R. J. C. of his failure/refusal to pay

the fee due for the record. We requested a response by March 8, 2004, and warned that the failure

to respond would result in the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution.

Because we have not received any communication from R. J. C. and he has not paid

f or, or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record, we dismiss this appe al for want of

prosecution on our own initiative. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith and Pemberton

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: March 18, 2004
deac_ex1029.htm


EXHIBIT 10.29


 


Addendum #1 to the Revolving Line of Credit Agreement


 



	
[$120,000.00]

	
[03/31/2014]







 


This Addendum to the Revolving  Line of Credit Agreement  by and between Elite Data Services, Inc.,  a Florida Corporation   (the "BORROWER") and Sarah Myers an Individual ("LENDER") is made and executed as of the date referred to above. An additional principal sum totaling Eighty Thousand Dollars and 00/100 ($80,000) has been added  to  the  Revolving  Line  of  Credit  Agreement Promissory Note dated  September 1, 2013  (the "LOAN AGREEMENT"), bringing the Loan Agreement to a total sum of One Hundred and Twenty Thousand Dollars and 00/100 ($120,000). The default date under the Loan Agreement has been extended to December 1, 2014.


 


This Addendum shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of Florida.


 


 





	By:	/s/ Steven Frye	 
	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Sarah Myers
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.1

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 annual report of HBL, LLC (the Company) on Form
10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Roger S. Penske, Jr.,
Chairman of the Board 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; 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/ Roger S. Penske,
Jr.

Roger S. Penske, Jr.
Chairman of the Board

April 11, 2003
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6267

GARRY DARNELL SAUNDERS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PORTSMOUTH CITY JAIL, Sheriff, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis III, District Judge. (CA-04-175) Submitted: July 14, 2005 Decided: July 22, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Garry Darnell Saunders, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene Paul Murphy, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Garry Darnell Saunders, a Virginia inmate, seeks to appeal the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition and his subsequent motion to reconsider. We conclude Saunders’ notice of appeal is untimely. A notice of appeal in a civil case must be filed within thirty days of the entry of the judgment being appealed. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The district court, upon a finding of excusable neglect or good cause, may extend the time period for filing a notice of appeal an additional thirty days. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5). The appeal periods established by Rule 4 are mandatory and jurisdictional. Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978); United States v. Raynor, 939 F.2d 191, 197 (4th Cir. 1991). The district court denied Saunders’ § 2254 petition by order entered on July 7, 2004. His subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied by order entered on September 30, 2004. He did not file a notice of appeal until February 2005, over four months later, and never sought an extension of time in the district court. Thus, Saunders’ notice of appeal is clearly untimely. Accordingly, we deny Saunders’ motion for appointment of counsel and dismiss his appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.- 3 - DISMISSED
Exhibit 23.3

Huddleston & Co., Inc.

Petroleum and Geological
Engineers

1 HOUSTON CENTER

1221 MCKINNEY, SUITE 3700

HOUSTON,
TEXAS 77010





PHONE (713) 209-1100  FAX (713) 752-0828

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS

Huddleston & Co., Inc. does hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-4 (No. 333-124544) of Dorchester Minerals, L.P. of our estimates of reserves included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including, without limitation, Exhibit 99.2,
and to all references to our firm included in this Annual Report.



HUDDLESTON & CO., INC. Texas
Registered Engineering Firm F-1024LOGOBy:

Gregory S. Floyd, P.E.Vice President


Houston, Texas

February 18, 2010
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 Annual Report of MTC Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to such officers knowledge:



| | (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 as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 13, 2007



/s/ Rajesh K. SoinName: Rajesh K. SoinTitle: Chief Executive Officer/s/ Michael I. GearhardtName: Michael I. GearhardtTitle: Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Project No. 2210-175-VA] 

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed Appalachian Power Company's proposed water withdraw for the Smith Mountain Hydroelectric Project, located on the Roanoke River in Bedford, Campbell, Franklin, and Pittsylvania Counties, Virginia and has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA). 

On May 27, 2008 Appalachian Power Company (licensee), filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) for non-project use of project lands and waters. The EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental effects of the proposed project and concludes that approval of the Proposed Action, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment. 

                    Copies of the EA are available for review in Public Reference Room 2-A of the Commission's offices at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC. The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at                     *http://www.ferc.gov*                     using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number (P-2210) excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov*                     or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, (202) 502-8659.                 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8-24658 Filed 10-16-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Exhibit
        32
 Section
        1350 Certifications
 
 **STATEMENT
        FURNISHED PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 The
        undersigned is the Principal Executive and Financial Officer of Bestway Coach
        Express Inc. This Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This Certification accompanies the Annual Report
        on
        Form 10-KSB of Bestway Coach Express Inc., for the year ended November 30,
        2005.
 
 The
        undersigned certifies that such 10-KSB Report 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 10-KSB Report fairly presents,
        in all
        material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Bestway
        Coach Express Inc. as of November 30, 2005.
 
 This
        Certification is executed as of March 15, 2006.
 
 
 
 *By:
        /s/Wilson
        Cheng*
 *Name:
        Wilson Cheng*
 *Title:
        Chairman, President & Treasurer*
 *(Principal
        Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)*
  A
          signed
          original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
          to
          Bestway Coach Express Inc. and will be retained by Bestway Coach Express
          Inc.
          and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
          request.
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

      In connection with Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report of
Central Jersey Bancorp (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2005 (the "Report"), I, James S. Vaccaro, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:

(1)   the Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of ss.13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. ss.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.



Dated: May 24, 2006                        /s/ James S. Vaccaro
                                           --------------------
                                           James S. Vaccaro
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-40188

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GARY LEWIS MALONSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(4:97-CR-64-1)

 

November 24, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Malonson appeals his sentence entered after he pled guilty to

violating 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). In

particular, Malonson contends that the district court erred in

calculating his offense level by relying upon information he

divulged, after executing a plea agreement, about the quantity of

drugs involved in the conspiracy. According to Malonson, the

district court’s use of this information violated U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8.

Malonson’s claim that the terms of his plea agreement were not

honored distills down to an objection about the district court’s
2

determination of the quantity of drugs implicated in the crime, a

finding of fact we review under the clearly erroneous standard.

See United States v. Gibson, 48 F.3d 876, 878 (5th Cir. 1995),

cert. denied, 516 U.S. 852 (1995). Though Malonson argues that he

provided the probation officer with all the details concerning the

amount of drugs involved in his illegal activities, the probation

officer stated in the presentence report that he only relied upon

the statements given by Malonson’s co-conspirators in making his

drug quantity calculation. In addition, the probation officer

averred that Malonson refused to discuss the quantity of drugs

involved in his operation. Since Malonson points to no evidence

demonstrating its inaccuracy, the district court was entitled to

rely upon the PSR. See United States v. Franklin, 148 F.3d 451,

460 (5th Cir. 1998) (“Absent rebuttal evidence demonstrating

inaccuracy, which evidence the defendant bears the burden of

producing, district courts are entitled to rely on PSRs.”). Because

none of the drug-quantity information used to calculate the base

offense level came from Malonson, “the district court’s

determination that § 1B1.8 was not violated will not be disturbed.”

Gibson, 48 F.3d at 879.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Edmond FIGUEROA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 68, Docket 27852.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued Oct. 8, 1963.

Decided Oct. 21, 1963.

*730Gretchen White Oberman, The Legal Aid Society, New York City (Anthony F. Marra, The Legal Aid Society, New York City, on the brief), for defendant-appellant.

Ezra H. Friedman, Asst. U. S. Atty., S.D.N.Y., New York City (Robert M. Morgenthau, U. S. Atty., and James M. Brachman, Asst. U. S. Atty., New York City, on the brief), for appellee.

Before CLARK, MOORE and KAUFMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was arrested without a warrant by narcotics agents, who, on the basis of the information of a reliable informant and their own investigation and surveillance, had reason to believe that he was a seller of narcotics and was then in possession of a quantity of heroin. Prior to his trial, defendant moved to suppress the evidence consisting of narcotics obtained in the search subsequent to his arrest, on the grounds that he was arrested without probable cause and that the subsequent search was illegal. This motion was carefully considered and denied by Judge Cashin prior to the trial. D.C.S.D.N.Y., 204 F.Supp. 641. Defendant now renews his contention and argues that the forcible entry of the agents was illegal because they did not state their purpose as required by Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 482, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed. 2d 441.

In this case, unlike Wong Sun, the agents immediately identified themselves without attempt at deception. As in United States v. Nicholas, 2 Cir., 319 F.2d 697, the conduct of defendant and his aunt on learning the agents’ identity made the announcement of their purpose a “useless gesture.” This conduct, combined with the easily disposable nature of the evidence sought, justified their subsequent actions. See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 483-484, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441; cf. Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23, 83 S.Ct. 1623, 10 L.Ed.2d 726.

Our thanks are due Mrs. Oberman and the New York Legal Aid Society for effective representation of the defendant on assignment of the court.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 99(a)

Household Finance Corporation
Household Automotive Trust 2001-3
---------------------------------


Original Principal Class A
   Class A-1                            200,000,000
   Class A-2                            147,000,000
   Class A-3                            290,000,000
   Class A-4                            183,000,000
Number of Class A Bonds (000's)
   Class A-1                                200,000
   Class A-2                                147,000
   Class A-3                                290,000
   Class A-4                                183,000


Distribution Date                                                   2002 Totals
Days

CLASS A
Class A-1 Principal Distribution                                  157,759,356.46
Class A-1 Interest Distribution                                     1,231,599.90

Class A-2 Principal Distribution                                  102,775,994.52
Class A-2 Interest Distribution                                     3,597,181.79

Class A-3 Principal Distribution                                            0.00
Class A-3 Interest Distribution                                    10,671,999.96

Class A-4 Principal Distribution                                            0.00
Class A-4 Interest Distribution                                     7,997,100.00
#### STANLEY FIGULA ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF CITY OF PASSAIC ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

Submitted October 31, 1947

Decided January 29, 1948.

For the appellants, *Nicholas Martini.*

For the respondents, *Thomas E. Duffy*and *Murner & Murner (Thomas E.*Duffy, of counsel).

Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered *per curiam*in the Supreme Court.

*For affirmance*— The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Bodine, Heher, Wachenfeld, Burling, Wells, Dill, Freund, McLean, Schettino, JJ. 11.

*For reversal*— None.