alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Clarence DANIELS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 04-16550. D.C. No. CV-03-04835-CRB.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Feb. 14, 2005.

Decided Feb. 16, 2005.

Clarence Daniels, Vacaville, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Sanford Svetcov, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Robbins LLP, Bradley A. Solomon, Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before D.W. NELSON, W. FLETCHER and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

California state prisoner Clarence Roy Daniels brought a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against prison doctors. Daniels alleges that the doctors were deliberately indifferent for over one year to his pleas for medical care for his continuing throat pain. Upon being transferred to another prison, Daniels was diagnosed with throat cancer *294and his voice box, part of his tongue and neck muscles were surgically removed. The district court dismissed Daniels’ claims against the doctors, finding that because he did not name the individual doctor-defendants in his administrative appeals he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PLRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e. Daniels appeals the district court’s dismissal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we reverse and remand to the district court for adjudication on the merits of Daniels’ claim.

Under the PLRA, an inmate is required to use the administrative process that the state provides in order to exhaust his administrative remedies. *See Butler v. Adams,*397 F.3d 1181, 1183 (9th Cir.2005). In preparing an administrative appeal, California regulations provide that “[t]he appellant shall use a CDC Form 602 (rev. 12-87), Inmate/Parolee Appeal Form, to describe the problem and action requested.” *See*Cal-Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3084.2(a). The applicable CDC form does not require identification of any specific persons. Daniels completed the form and described the problem and the action requested. “Doing so, he availed himself of the administrative process the state gave him. The PLRA does not require more.” *Butler,*397 F.3d at 1183. Accordingly, we must reverse the district court’s judgment that Daniels failed to exhaust his administrative remedies by failing to name Drs. Lucine and Becker. Daniels has properly exhausted his administrative remedies under the PLRA.

REVERSED and REMANDED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION

SUPERHYPE TAPES, LTD.,

PLAINTIFF,

V.

AANSTORE, ET AL.,

DEFENDANTS.

CASE NO.: 1:20-CV-01589

JUDGE ELAINE E. BUCKLO

MAGISTRATE JUDGE SUNIL R. HARJANI

NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff hereby files this Notice of Voluntary 

Dismissal, without prejudice, as to the following Defendant(s) identified on Schedule “A” of the 

Complaint:

NO. DEFENDANT

117 kickstage_taiwan

82 hkrecords

Dated: July 3, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Alison Carter

Ann Marie Sullivan

Alison Carter

Raymond Lang

AM Sullivan Law, LLC

1440 W. Taylor St., Suite 515

Chicago, Illinois 60607

Telephone: 224-258-9378

E-mail: ams@amsullivanlaw.com

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 

document was electronically filed on July 3, 2020 with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF

system, which will automatically send an email notification ofsuch filing to all registered attorneys 

of record.

/s/ Alison Carter

Alison Carter
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY

ACT OF 2002

In connection with this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Medical Properties Trust, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2018 (the “Report”), each of the undersigned, Edward K. Aldag, Jr. and R. Steven Hamner, certifies, pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| Date: August 6, 2019 |   |   |   |   |   | /s/ Edward K. Aldag, Jr.              |
|----------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                 |   |   |   |   |   | Edward K. Aldag, Jr.                                 |
|                 |   |   |   |   |   | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer      |
|                 |   |   |   |
|                 |   |   |   |   |   | /s/ R. Steven Hamner                                 |
|                 |   |   |   |   |   | R. Steven Hamner                                     |
|                 |   |   |   |   |   | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 2:16-cv-00096-MHB Document 4 Filed 01/15/16 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 2:16-cv-00096-MHB Document 4 Filed 01/15/16 Page 2 of 2
#### C. L. Peyton *v.*Asa Carter.

Removal of Causes — Petition for Removal Filed — Proceedings in State Court to Cease — Failure to File Copy of Record in United States Court.

After the filing of a petition, for removal to the United. States Court, properly verified, further proceedings in the State Court should cease and not be resumed until a certificate, from the Federal Court stating that the petitioner has failed to file a copy of the record in that Court, is produced.

APPEAR FROM MORGAN CIRCUIT COURT.

April 12, 1871.

Holt, *for appellant.*

Hazelrigg, *for appellee.*

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Lindsay:

At the June term, 1867, of the Morgan circuit court this cause was, upon the petition of appellant, properly removed to the circuit court of the United States for the District of Kentucky, under the provisions of the Act-of Congress, approved March 3, 1863, and amended May 11, 1866. The third section of the amendment to-said act (Statutes at Large, volume 14, page 46), provides that after filing of the petition for removal properly verified, “the further proceedings in the State Court shall cease, and not be resumed until a certificate under the seal of the circuit court of the United States, stating that the petitioner has failed to file copies in the said circuit court, at the nest term, is procured.” No such certificate having been produced in this case, it was error upon the part of the circuit court of Morgan county to proceed with the trial of the action. Wherefore the judgment must be revorsed.
Smith Barney Futures Management LLC
                         388 Greenwich Street, 7th Floor
                          New York, New York 10013-2396

May 31, 2000


John W. Henry & Company, Inc.
One Glendinning Place
Westport, Ct. 06880
Attn: Ms. Beth Kenton

         Re:      Management Agreement Renewals

Dear Ms. Kenton:

We are  writing  with  respect  to your  management  agreements  concerning  the
commodity pools to which reference is made below (the "Management  Agreements").
We are extending the term of the Management  Agreements through June 30, 2001and
all other provisions of the Management Agreements will remain unchanged.

                       Hutton Investors Futures Fund, L.P. II  (HIFF II)
                       Shearson Lehman Select Advisors Futures Fund L.P.
                       Shearson Mid-West Futures Fund
                       Smith Barney Mid-West Futures Fund L.P. II
                       Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P.
                       Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. II
                       Smith Barney Principal Plus Futures Fund L.P.
                       Smith Barney Principal Plus Futures Fund L.P. II
                       Smith Barney Westport Futures Fund L.P.

Please  acknowledge  receipt of this  modification  by signing  one copy of this
letter and returning it to the  attention of Mr. Daniel  Dantuono at the address
above or fax to  212-723-8985.  If you have any  questions  I can be  reached at
212-723-5416.

Very truly yours,

SMITH BARNEY FUTURES MANAGEMENT LLC

By:
         Daniel A. Dantuono
         Chief Financial Officer,
         Director & Treasurer

JOHN W. HENRY & COMPANY, INC.

By:

Print Name:
DAD/sr
Exhibit 32.2

                    PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of  California   Petroleum  Transport
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 as
filed with the  Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the "SEC") on or about the
date hereof (the "Report"),  I, R. Douglas  Donaldson, Treasurer 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:

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

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

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and
will be  retained  by the  Company  and  furnished  to the SEC or its staff upon
request.

Date: April 6, 2005

/s/ R Douglas Donaldson
------------------------
    R. Douglas Donaldson
    Treasurer
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

# Wntteb**~tate~** 

# ([ourt of**~peaI~** 

# for tbejfeberaI ([trcutt
LARRYE. BELTON, SR., Claimant-Appellant, v. 

### ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee. 2012-7150 Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in case no. 12-1077, Judge Mary J. Schoelen. 

### ON MOTION ORDER Larry 

### E. Belton, Sr. moves for a 30-day extension of time file his initial brief. Upon consideration thereof, IT Is ORDERED THAT: Case: 12-7150 Document: 9 Page: 1 Filed: 09/24/2012LARRY BELTON, SR. V. SHINSEKI The motion is granted. 

## SEP 24 2012 Date
cc: Larry E. Belton, Sr. Cameron Cohick, Esq. s27 2

FOR THE COURT /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk 

# fiLED 

## u.s.COUR OFAPPEALS FOR THEFEDERAl. CIRCUIT 

### SEP 24 ZU1L JANHORBAlY CLERK Case: 12-7150 Document: 9 Page: 2 Filed: 09/24/2012
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT TOSHIBA J. SANDERS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-3376 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed April 24, 2019. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; J. Kevin Abdoney, Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, MORRIS, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-QSB

ý
Quarterly report pursuant section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For the quarterly period ended October 31, 2006r
Transition report pursuant section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For the transition period from ________________ to ________________Commission file number 0-29067


Most Home Corp.

Nevada 
(State of Incorporation)
98-0173359
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)


Unit 1, 11491 Kingston St.
Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada V2X 0Y6Tel: (604) 460-7634(Address and telephone number of Registrant's principal
executive offices and principal place of business)

Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý
      No r

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes r
      No ý

As of December 13, 2006 the Company had 31,036,947 outstanding shares of Common Stock. This amount excludes 1,700,000 shares of common stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,700,000 Series A Preferred shares

Transitional Small Business Disclosure Format (Check one): Yes r
      No ý







This Amendment No. 1 to Most Home Corp.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter ended October 31, 2006 is being filed to amend its disclosure on the
status that the Company's independent public accountant has not completed its
review of the Company's financial statements.  This was an error and the review
was completed on December 20, 2006.  Therefore, the following paragraph on page
28 under heading "Cautionary Statement" of the Company's said Quarterly Report
filed on December 21, 2006 is hereby deleted.

"The required review of the Registrant's financial statement by the independent public accountant is currently under way."

This amendment has no impact on the financial statements of the registrant for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2006. Besides the said disclosures, no other changes have been made to the Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2006.





SIGNATURES

In accordance with the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

|                        | MOST HOME CORP.                                                                             
|----------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: December 27, 2006 | By:   Kenneth Galpin         Kenneth Galpin, 
         President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date: December 27, 2006 | By:   Michael Schutz         Michael Schutz, 
         Chief Financial Officer
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Moises Ramos-Lesama, 

Defendant. 

NO. CR-15-01537-001-PHX-GMS

ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING 

DISPOSITION (PURSUANT TO 

18 U.S.C. § 3143) 

In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3143, a detention hearing was 

submitted on 3/23/2017. Defendant was present and was represented by counsel. The 

defendant has not rebutted by clear and convincing evidence that he is not likely to flee if 

released. 

FINDINGS OF FACT 

I find by a preponderance of the evidence that: 

☒ The defendant is not a citizen of the United States or lawfully admitted for 

permanent residence. 

☒ The defendant, at the time of the charged offense, was in the United States 

illegally. 

☒ The defendant has a prior criminal history. 

☒ The defendant has been ordered detained on the underlying 8 USC 1326(a)&(b)(1) 

charged in Case No: 17-1221MJ. 

The Court incorporates by reference the material findings of the Pretrial Services Agency 

which were reviewed by the Court at the time of the hearing in this matter, except as 

noted in the record. 

Case 2:15-cr-01537-GMS Document 33 Filed 03/27/17 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 

1. There is a serious risk that the defendant will flee. 

2. No condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance 

of the defendant as required. 

DIRECTIONS REGARDING DETENTION 

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his/her designated 

representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, 

from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The 

defendant shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense 

counsel. On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the 

Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to 

the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court 

proceeding. 

APPEALS AND THIRD PARTY RELEASE 

 IT IS ORDERED that should an appeal of this detention order be filed with the 

District Court, it is counsel's responsibility to deliver a copy of the motion for 

review/reconsideration to Pretrial Services at least one day prior to the hearing set before 

the District Court. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if a release to a third party is to be considered, it 

is counsel's responsibility to notify Pretrial Services sufficiently in advance of the hearing 

before the District Court to allow Pretrial Services an opportunity to interview and 

investigate the potential third party custodian. 

DATE: 3/23/2017 

Honorable James F. Metcalf

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:15-cr-01537-GMS Document 33 Filed 03/27/17 Page 2 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

IN RE: BARD IVC FILTERS 

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

No. MDL-15-02641-PHX-DGC

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ 

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO FILE 

DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL IN SUPPORT 

OF DISCOVERY BRIEFING

Plaintiffs have filed a motion to file documents under seal. Doc. 696. 

IT IS ORDERED: 

1. That the motion to seal (Doc. 696) is granted. The exhibits that are the subject 

of Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion To File Document Under Seal In Support Of 

Discovery Briefing (Exhibits 7, 8, 9, and 15 to Plaintiffs’ Memorandum Re Relevancy 

and Discoverability of FDA Inspection and Warning Letter and Recovery Cone 

Removal System) constitute “Confidential Information” under the Stipulated Protective 

Order, and trade secrets or other confidential research, development or commercial 

information pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1)(G), and therefore warrant 

protection from public disclosure for a discovery-related motion. 

2. The Clerk is directed to accept for filing under seal the document lodged on the 

Court’s docket at Doc. 698. 

Dated this 17th day of February, 2016. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 847 Filed 02/17/16 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63
OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as principal financial officer of Xerium Technologies, Inc. (the Company), does
hereby certify that, to his knowledge:

1) the Companys Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009, 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 Companys
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ David G. MaffucciDavid G. Maffucci Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)


Dated: March 26, 2010