alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### William Dilworth, Jr., *v.*William L. Murphy.

Mortgages — Surrender of Lien.

A mortgagee should not. be compelled to surrender his lien on any of the property embraced in the mortgage until all parties in interest are brought into court and their respective interests adjudged.

APPEAL PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT.

January 14, 1873.

*323Opinion by

Judge Lindsay :

It is not pretended that the wharf property will sell for a sum sufficient to satisfy the claims of all persons holding liens on it. The note transferred to Dilworth .by the Bank of Kentucky is secured by a mortgage on both the wharf property and the Preston Street lot. Except for the fact that the latter property has been purchased by Murphy, it is clear that those holding liens on the wharf property subordinate to the lien in favor of the note now held by Dilworth, could in equity compel him in the collection of the note assigned to him by the bank to resort first to the Preston Street lot.

The decree of the vice-chancellor is doubtless based upon the idea that the purchase by Murphy gives him an equity superior to those of the holders of the junior mortgage on the wharf lot, and that as they can not compel Dilworth to look primarily to his lot without disregarding the superior equity, they will not be allowed to do so.

It is not necessary that we should express an opinion as to whether or not this view is correct. The holders of the subordinate or inferior liens on the wharf property are not parties to this suit and are in no way bound by the judgment herein. If in the contest between Dilworth and the holders of these liens a different conclusion as to their respective rights shall be reached, they can insist, notwithstanding such .judgment, that he shall satisfy the note assigned to him' by the bank out of the Preston Street lot, and thus be deprived of the benefit of his superior lien on the wharf property, which, upon the other hand, the judgment in the case will debar him from looking to said lot for the payment of his debt.

It seems to the court that the appellee should have been required to make the holders of the liens on the wharf property parties to his suit, or else it should have been consolidated with suit No. 21,622, which, it appears, is pending in the chancery court, for the purpose of settling the superiority of the various liens on the wharf property.

Until all the parties in interest are in some manner brought before the court in the same proceeding and their respective rights adjudged, Dilworth ought not to be compelled to surrender his lien on any of the property embraced in the mortgage to the bank. *324The judgment appealed from is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

*Speed, Boyle, for appellant.*

*Elliott, for appellee.*
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6938

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

SHAUNTE TORRANE LASSITER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief 

District Judge. (2:07-cr-00060-RBS-TEM-3)

Submitted: August 16, 2012 Decided: August 21, 2012

Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shaunte Torrane Lassiter, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie 

Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Shaunte Torrane Lassiter appeals the district court’s 

orders denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion and 

motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error in the court’s denial of § 3582(c)(2) 

relief. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. United States v. Lassiter, No. 2:07-cr-00060-

RBS-TEM-3 (E.D. Va. Apr. 19, 2012). Because the district court 

lacked authority to reconsider its initial order, see United 

States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 235-36 (4th Cir. 2010), we 

affirm the court’s denial of Lassiter’s motion to reconsider. 

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.

AFFIRMED
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.
 Federal Communications Commission
 The Federal Communications Commission will hold a Special Commission Meeting on the subject listed below on Friday, October 24, 2014. The meeting is scheduled to commence at 2:30 p.m. in Room TW-C305, at 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC. Item No.
Bureau
Subject1
ENFORCEMENT
TITLE: Enforcement Bureau Action.SUMMARY: The Commission will consider whether to take an enforcement action.
 Additional information concerning this meeting may be obtained from Mark Wigfield, Office of Media Relations, (202) 418-0253; TTY 1-888-835-5322. Copies of materials adopted at this meeting can be purchased from the FCC's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (202) 488-5300; Fax (202) 488-5563; TTY (202) 488-5562. These copies are available in paper format and alternative media, including large print/type; digital disk; and audio and video tape. Best Copy and Printing, Inc. may be reached by email at 
                    *FCC@BCPIWEB.com.* Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2014-27564 Filed 11-21-14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 222 (Tuesday, November 18, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68687-68688]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27349]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and 
Human Development; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the 
National Advisory Board on Medical Rehabilitation Research.
    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to 
space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special 
assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable 
accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in 
advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Board on Medical 
Rehabilitation Research.
    Date: December 1-2, 2014.
    Time: December 1, 2014, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: NCMRR report and NICHD report; collaborations with FDA; 
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Cancer 
rehabilitation.
    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda Hotel, One Bethesda Metro Center, 
Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Time: December 2, 2014, 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
    Agenda: NIH Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 
Spinal cord research.
    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda Hotel, One Bethesda Metro Center, 
Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Ralph M. Nitkin, Ph.D., Acting Director, 
National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research (NCMRR), 
Director, Biological Sciences and Career Development Program, NCMRR, 
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development, NIH, DHHS, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 2A03, 
Bethesda, MD 20892-7510, (301) 402-4206, [email protected].
    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home 
page: http://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/advisory/nabmrr/Pages/index.aspx where the current roster and minutes from past meetings 
are posted.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children;

[[Page 68688]]

93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS).

    Dated: November 13, 2014.
Michelle Trout,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-27349 Filed 11-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
**Exhibit 13.4**

 

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

 

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of Inmarsat Group Limited (the “Company”) forthe annual period ended 31 December 2008 (the “Periodic Report”), I, Rick Medlock, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge the Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

 

Date: 29 April 2009
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3934 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3934

  To halt the issuance of visas to citizens of Saudi Arabia until the 
     President certifies that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia does not 
    discriminate in the issuance of visas on the basis of religious 
                        affiliation or heritage.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 10, 2004

  Mr. Weiner (for himself, Mr. Ferguson, Mr. Wexler, Ms. Berkley, Ms. 
    Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Deutsch, and Mr. Israel) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To halt the issuance of visas to citizens of Saudi Arabia until the 
     President certifies that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia does not 
    discriminate in the issuance of visas on the basis of religious 
                        affiliation or heritage.

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

SECTION 1. FINDING.

    The Congress finds that an official website of the Saudi Arabian 
Government's Supreme Commission for Tourism included the following 
text:
            ``Visas will not be issued for the following groups of 
        people:
                    ``An Israeli passport holder or a passport that has 
                an Israeli arrival/departure stamp.
                    ``Those who don't abide by the Saudi traditions 
                concerning appearance and behaviors. Those under the 
                influence of alcohol will not be permitted into the 
                Kingdom.
                    ``There are certain regulations for pilgrims and 
                you should contact the consulate for more information.
                    ``Jewish People.''

SEC. 2. CESSATION OF VISA ISSUANCE.

    Beginning on the day after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
no visa shall be issued by the Government of the United States to a 
citizen of Saudi Arabia until the President certifies that the Kingdom 
of Saudi Arabia does not discriminate in the issuance of visas on the 
basis of religious affiliation or heritage.
                                 <all>
```
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4109 

To allow seniors with Social Security and pension income to file their income 

tax returns on a new Form 1040SR without regard to the amount 

of interest or taxable income of the senior. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 1, 2004 

Mr. BURNS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To allow seniors with Social Security and pension income 

to file their income tax returns on a new Form 1040SR 

without regard to the amount of interest or taxable income of the senior. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Simple Tax for Seniors 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds the following: 
2 

•HR 4109 IH 

1 (1) More than 35,000,000 individuals are pro2 hibited from using Form 1040EZ to file their in3 come tax returns simply because they are age 62 or 

4 older. 

5 (2) The Congress should aggressively seek to 

6 end age discrimination in Federal tax regulation. 

7 (3) The Internal Revenue Service reports that 

8 each year seniors file more than 11,000,000 tax re9 turns claiming only the standard deduction. Because 

10 some tax returns are joint returns, standard-deduc11 tion returns represent close to 15,000,000 seniors. 

12 Many, if not all, of these seniors would appreciate 

13 the option of a simple and less time-consuming Fed14 eral tax return. 

15 (4) The Internal Revenue Service reports that 

16 processing a Form 1040 costs the Government— 

17 and, therefore, taxpayers—50 percent more than 

18 processing a Form 1040EZ. 

19 SEC. 3. FORM 1040SR FOR CERTAIN SENIORS. 

20 (a) IN GENERAL.—An eligible senior (and, in the 

21 case of a joint return, such individual’s spouse) shall not 

22 be treated as ineligible to use the form referred to in sub23 section (b) to file the return of tax imposed under section 

24 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for any taxable 
3 

•HR 4109 IH 

1 year beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act 

2 on the basis of— 

3 (1) such individual receiving any social security 

4 benefit or any distribution from a retirement plan, 

5 (2) the amount of such taxpayer’s taxable inter6 est income, or 

7 (3) the amount of such taxpayer’s taxable in8 come. 

9 (b) FORM 1040SR.—The Secretary of the Treasury 

10 shall develop a form for purposes of carrying out sub11 section (a). Such form shall be similar to Form 1040EZ, 

12 known as ‘‘Form 1040SR’’, and a single page which is 

8 1 13 ⁄2 inches by 11 inches in size with clear and reasonable 

14 type. 

15 (c) ELIGIBLE SENIOR.—For purposes of this section, 

16 the term ‘‘eligible senior’’ means, with respect to any tax17 able year, any individual who has attained age 62 as of 

18 the close of such taxable year. 

Æ
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-4758

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

KENNETH LEE GARDNER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (8:06-

cr-00422-PJM)

Submitted: January 17, 2008 Decided: January 22, 2008 

Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Wyda, Federal Public Defender, Paresh S. Patel, Staff

Attorney, Lisa W. Lunt, Assistant Federal Public Defender,

Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United

States Attorney, Emily N. Glatfelter, Assistant United States

Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Lee Gardner pled guilty to possession of a

firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2000), and was

sentenced as an armed career criminal to the mandatory minimum term

of fifteen years imprisonment under 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(e) (West 2000

& Supp. 2007). Gardner appeals his sentence. We affirm.

Gardner argues that his sentence violates the Sixth

Amendment under Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), and

United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), because the predicate

convictions were neither admitted by him nor proved to a jury

beyond a reasonable doubt. As Gardner concedes, we have rejected

this argument in previous decisions. See United States

v. Williams, 461 F.3d 441, 452 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct.

616 (2006); United States v. Cheek, 415 F.3d 349, 354 (4th Cir.

2005). 

We therefore affirm the sentence imposed by the district

court. 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.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF KOGER EQUITY, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           4,096
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,265
<ALLOWANCES>                                       548
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         964,872
<DEPRECIATION>                                 147,445
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 849,274
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                        336,405
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           295
<OTHER-SE>                                     450,114
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   849,274
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               126,372
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   48,941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                42,165
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   622
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,559
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,522
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (19)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             20,541
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,541
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.77
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.76
<FN>
THE COMPANY DOES NOT FILE A CLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET, THEREFORE THESE NOT
PROVIDED 5-02(9), 5-02(21)
</FN>


</TABLE>
Figure XX. Schematic drawings of the chair mockup showing the nominal cushion dimensions in mm. 

Chair components are sized larger than the cushions to provide a plump shape. Arm rests are built by 

combining a 25 mm thick foam layer with a 5 mm thick plywood.

25 1000 (39 3/8”)

FRONT VIEW

SIDE VIEW

950 (39 2/5”)

(1020 × 1020 × 170) mm3 polyester fibers

.

(1020 × 370 × 25) mm3 foam

(1020 × 1020 × 170) mm3 foam

(950 × 300 × 5) mm3 plywood

Nominal dimensions of chair components

Back cushion: polyester fibers

.

Armrest: foam

Seat cushion: foam

Armrest: plywood

Materials used for each chair component

components and materials
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION











Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of ING Life Insurance and Annuity
Company (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010
(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.











May 7, 2010
            
            By: /s/
            Ewout L. Steenbergen(Date)
            
            
            Ewout L. Steenbergen
              Executive Vice President and
              Chief Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 31.1Section 302 Certification I, Ellen Z. Lamale, certify that: I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containing
distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of period included in the year covered by
this annual report, of Principal Life Income Fundings Trust 2004-6;  1.
    Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;  2.
    Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided to
the depositor by the trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, for
inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;  3.
    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the depositor and the trustee
under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, and based upon my knowledge and the
annual compliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the
reports, the depositor and trustee have each fulfilled its obligations under that agreement;
and  4.
    The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the compliance by the trustee
and the depositor with the minimum servicing or similar standards based upon the report
provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with the
Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedures, as set forth in
the pooling and servicing, or similar agreements, that is included in these reports. In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the
following unaffiliated parties: Ernst and Young and Citibank, N.A. Date: March 29, 2005 By:      /s/ Ellen Z. Lamale
Name: Ellen Z. Lamale
Title:   Senior Vice President and Chief Actuary