alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 2

Deny and Opinion Filed January 19, 2022 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-01102-CV 

IN RE PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC, Relator 

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 3 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-17-02785-C 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Myers, Partida-Kipness, and Carlyle 

Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness 

Before the Court are relator’s December 14, 2021 petition for writ of 

mandamus and motion for emergency stay. 

Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court 

clearly abused its discretion and that he lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re 

Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). 

Based on our review of the petition, record, and response, we conclude 

relator has failed to demonstrate an entitlement to mandamus relief. Accordingly, 

we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). 
 –2– 

We deny relator’s motion for emergency stay as moot. 

211102F.P05 

/Robbie Partida-Kipness/

ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS 

JUSTICE
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Innovative Material Finds New Use for Future Aircraft Antennas","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"uhj9rgTFxB\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/innovative-material-finds-new-use-future-aircraft-antennas-2\/\">Innovative Material Finds New Use for Future Aircraft Antennas<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/innovative-material-finds-new-use-future-aircraft-antennas-2\/embed\/#?secret=uhj9rgTFxB\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Innovative Material Finds New Use for Future Aircraft Antennas” — NASA\" data-secret=\"uhj9rgTFxB\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/grc-2018-c-08770.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Exhibit 32(b)

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 United Rentals, Inc. and United Rentals (North America), Inc. (the Companies) on
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, William B. Plummer, Chief Financial Officer of the Companies, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                         
|-------------------------
|/S/    WILLIAM B.
PLUMMER
|William B. Plummer       
|Chief Financial Officer  

April 21,
2010
EXHIBIT 99(b)



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



This certification is provided in connection with the Quarterly Report of United Rentals, Inc. and United Rentals (North America), Inc. (the
Companies) for the quarter ended March 31, 2003. Such report is comprised of a Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, as amended by Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-Q/A (the Report). I, John N. Milne, President and Chief Financial Officer
of the Companies, 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) 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 Companies.



/s/    JOHN N.
MILNEJohn N. Milne President and Chief Financial Officer




|June |  | 23, 2003
|---- |  | --------



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to United Rentals, Inc. and United Rentals (North America), Inc. and will be retained by such companies and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Kaitlyn Adams","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/kaitlyn-e-adamsnasa-gov\/","title":"NASA’s DC-8 airborne science laboratory is shadowed by a NASA F\/A-18 chase plane during a flyover of the Dryden Aircraft Operations Facility in Palmdale, Calif.","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"BGWGwxM7rf\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/amf-ed07-0256-26\/\">NASA’s DC-8 airborne science laboratory is shadowed by a NASA F\/A-18 chase plane during a flyover of the Dryden Aircraft Operations Facility in Palmdale, Calif.<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/amf-ed07-0256-26\/embed\/#?secret=BGWGwxM7rf\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA’s DC-8 airborne science laboratory is shadowed by a NASA F\/A-18 chase plane during a flyover of the Dryden Aircraft Operations Facility in Palmdale, Calif.” — NASA\" data-secret=\"BGWGwxM7rf\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/images-assets.nasa.gov\/image\/ED07-0256-26\/ED07-0256-26~large.jpg?w=600&h=1536&fit=clip&crop=faces%2Cfocalpoint","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":1536}
#### Perry Wherritt *v.*N. M. Durbin.

Vendor and Purchaser — Deficit—“More or Less” Annexed to Designation of Quantity.

Appellee being the vendee of White, who was vendee of Fowler, who was vendee of Wherritt, who was vendee of Crow, of a tract of land described by metes and bounds in the several deeds, but recited that it contained 164 acres, “more or less,” when it contained less than 130 acres. The appellant knew nothing of its boundaries, but Fowler did, and attempted to make the purchase by the acre, which appellant refused, hence, he bought by the gross, with the words “more or less”' annexed, to the designation of the quantity. Appellee sued Crow, in equity, on the covenant of general warranty in his deed to appellant; Crow proved by appellant that it was understood between him and Crow that there was a deficiency, hence, the words “more or less” in the deed. Appellee then by amendment sued appellant on his deed to Fowler, and dismissed as to Crow. Held, that the sale was in gross and not by the acre.

APPEAL FROM HARRISON CIRCUIT COURT.

February 19, 1870.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Williams:

Durbin being the vendee of White, who was vendee of Fowler, who was vendee of AATierritt, who was vendee of Crow and wife, of a tract of land described by metes and bounds in the several deeds but reciting that it contained 164 acres *“more or less”*when in fact it contained something less than 130 acres.

Wherritt had never lived on the land and knew nothing of its boundaries but Fowler was tenant thereon when or soon after A¥herritt bought it and knew its boundaries and knew that it was generally understood in the neighborhood around the land that there was a deficiency, and he attempted to mate the purchase by the acre, which Wherritt peremptorily refused, hence, he bought by the gross and described boundaries, with the words “more or less” annexed to the designation of the quantity.

On survey it was ascertained to contain only about 129 3-4 acres when Durbin sued Crow in equity on the covenant of general warranty in his and his wife’s deed to Wherritt; Grow proved by *620Wherritt that it was understood between him and Crow that there was a deficiency, hence the words more or less in the deed. Durbin then by amendment sued Wherritt on his deed to Fowler and dismissed as to Crow, and the court adjudgd against him the value of the deficiency from which'he has appealed.

*Cleary & West, for appellant.*

Trimble, *for appellee.*

There was evidently neither fraud nor mistake in Wherritt’s sale to Fowler, for he made no representations as to the quantity and refsued to sell otherwise than by the designated boundaries, which are correct. Fowler knew there was a deficiency, as well as Wherritt; perhaps neither knew the exact amount of this, but still it indicates the meaning of the words more or less in connection with the recited boundaries and quantity.

As there is neither fraud nor mistake shown nor to be presumed from the facts the judgment was erroneous' and is reversed with directions to dismiss the petition as to Wherritt.
---

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 of REGI U.S., Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending April 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James Vandeberg, Chief Financial
Officer 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. | I have reviewed the Report;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | 2. | based on my knowledge, the 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 the Report;
      and
|
| | 3. | based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
      information included in the 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 the Report.                            

August 12, 2005

/s/ James Vandeberg 
  James Vandeberg, Chief Financial Officer 
  (Principal Financial Officer)

---
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-1296V 

UNPUBLISHED

CRAIG JOHNSON, 

 Petitioner,

v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran 

Filed: December 3, 2019

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)

Kathleen Margaret Loucks, Lommen Abdo Law Firm, Minneapolis, MN, for petitioner.

Debra A. Filteau Begley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On August 27, 2018, Craig Johnson filed a petition for compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the 

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he developed Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”) 

that was caused by an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on October 2, 2017. 

Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of 

Special Masters.

On November 27, 2019, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he

concedes that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 

4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent stated it is his position that petitioner has 

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 

required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the EGovernment Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to 

the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to 

redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of 

privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such 

material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids 

to Interpretation for a flu/GBS Table injury. Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees that 

petitioner is entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id.

In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that 

Petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2435 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
                                S. 2435

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 4, 2004

             Referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To permit Inspectors General to authorize staff to provide assistance 
  to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Missing Child Cold Case Review Act 
of 2004''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY OF INSPECTORS GENERAL.

    Title XXXVII of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 5779 et 
seq.) is amended by inserting after section 3701 the following:

``SEC. 3701A. AUTHORITY OF INSPECTORS GENERAL.

    ``(a) In General.--An Inspector General appointed under section 3 
or 8G of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) may 
authorize staff to assist the National Center for Missing and Exploited 
Children--
            ``(1) by conducting reviews of inactive case files to 
        develop recommendations for further investigations; and
            ``(2) by engaging in similar activities.
    ``(b) Limitations.--
            ``(1) Priority.--An Inspector General may not permit staff 
        to engage in activities described in subsection (a) if such 
        activities will interfere with the duties of the Inspector 
        General under the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 
        App.).
            ``(2) Funding.--No additional funds are authorized to be 
        appropriated to carry out this section.''.

            Passed the Senate October 1, 2004.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 477 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 477

To amend titles 23 and 49, United States Code, relating to metropolitan 
                               planning.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 21, 1997

  Mr. Hefley introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend titles 23 and 49, United States Code, relating to metropolitan 
                               planning.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS UNDER 
              HIGHWAY PROGRAM.

    (a) Percentage of Population Represented.--Section 134(b) of title 
23, United States Code, is amended in each of paragraphs (1), (4), and 
(5) by striking ``75 percent'' and inserting ``50 percent''.
    (b) Veto Power.--Section 134(b) of such title is amended in each of 
paragraphs (1), (5)(A), and (5)(B) by striking the parenthetical 
phrase.
    (c) Autonomy.--Section 134(e) of such title is amended by striking 
``and the State'' and all that follows through the period at the end 
and inserting the following: ``to ensure that the plans and programs 
required by this section are complied with. It is the responsibility of 
the State to provide oversight in the area with multiple metropolitan 
planning organizations.''.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS UNDER 
              TRANSIT PROGRAM.

    (a) Percentage of Population Represented.--Section 5303(c) of title 
49, United States Code, is amended in each of paragraphs (1)(A), 
(4)(B)(i), and (5)(A) by striking ``75 percent'' and inserting ``50 
percent''.
    (b) Veto Power.--Section 5303(c) of such title is amended in each 
of paragraphs (1)(A), (5)(A), and (5)(B) by striking the parenthetical 
phrase.
    (c) Autonomy.--Section 5303(e)(3) of such title is amended by 
striking ``and the State'' and all that follows through the period at 
the end and inserting the following: ``to ensure that the plans and 
programs required by this section are complied with. It is the 
responsibility of the State to provide oversight in the area with 
multiple metropolitan planning organizations.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### SEAHORSE BOAT & BARGE CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JACKSONVILLE SHIPYARDS, INC., Defendant-Appellee, Armco Steel Corporation et al., Defendants.

No. 77-3501.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 19, 1980.

*397J. Walter Ward Jr., New Orleans, La., for plaintiff-appellant.

Terriberry, Carroll, Yancey & Farrell, William E. Wright, Dean A. Sutherland, New Orleans, La., Ulmer, Murchison, Ashby & Ball, Courtney W. Stanton, Jacksonville, Fla., for defendant-appellee.

Before GOLDBERG, FRANK M. JOHNSON, Jr., and HATCHETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In this suit involving the purchase of a boat by a Louisiana resident from a Florida boatbuilder, plaintiffs claimed subject matter jurisdiction under diversity and admiralty jurisdiction. Jacksonville Shipyards was one of four parties named as defendants to the action. The district court granted Jacksonville Shipyards’ motion to dismiss the suit as to itself due to lack of personal jurisdiction, but did not certify the question to this Court. *See*Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b).

In a case involving multiple parties, dismissal of one party is not appealable absent a certification by the district court that complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). *See Cason v. Owen, 578*F.2d 572, 574 (5th Cir. 1978). Nor does the dismissal fall within the limited class of interlocutory appeals authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(3) relating to the rights and liabilities of parties in admiralty. *See Austracan (U.S.A.), Inc. v. M/V LEMONCORE,*500 F.2d 237, 240-41 (5th Cir. 1974).

Therefore, we dismiss Seahorse Boat & Barge Corporation’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Appeal DISMISSED.