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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA *

 * CRIMINAL NO. 14-00218-CG 

v. *

 * 

CHERYL A. DOTSON *

PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE

WHEREAS, in the Indictment in the above-entitled case, the United States 

sought forfeiture of property which represented a sum of money equal to the 

proceeds obtained, directly or indirectly as a result of the violation(s) of Title 18, 

United States Code, Section 1014 by defendant CHERYL A. DOTSON, pursuant to 

Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(2)(A);

AND WHEREAS, based upon the Indictment, the jury verdict entered on 

April 16, 2015, (Doc. 130) against the defendant CHERYL A. DOTSON, and the 

order of the Court awarding a money judgment in favor of the United States in the 

amount of $34,030.00;

WHEREAS, the United States has filed a Motion for Preliminary Order of 

Forfeiture which would consist of a personal money judgment against the defendant 

in the amount of $34,030.00; and

WHEREAS, Rule 32.2(c)(1) provides that “no ancillary proceeding is required 

to the extent that the forfeiture consists of a money judgment,”.

Now therefore, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

That the defendant shall forfeit to the United States the sum of $34,030.00, 

pursuant to subject to the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, Section 982;

Case 1:14-cr-00218-WS Document 157 Filed 08/10/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
2

That the aforementioned property is authorized to be held by the United 

States Marshals Service in their secure custody and control; and

That this Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce this Order, and to amend 

it as necessary, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(e).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(3), this Order of 

Forfeiture shall become final as to the defendant at the time of sentencing, and 

shall be made part of the sentence and included in the judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States, may, at any time, move 

pursuant to Rule 32.2(e) to amend this Order of Forfeiture to substitute property 

having a value not to exceed $34,030.00 to satisfy the money judgment in whole or 

in part.

The Clerk of the Court shall forward a certified digital copy of this Order to 

Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Bodnar, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern 

District of Alabama.

DONE and ORDERED this 10th day of August, 2015.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cr-00218-WS Document 157 Filed 08/10/15 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
#### Paducah Gulf Railroad Co. *v.*B. E. Adams.

Waiver of Right of Change of Venue — Joining of Causes of Action.

A party may waive his right to a change of venue, by voluntarily consenting that no change of venue would be applied for, in order to obtain a continuance.

Joining of Causes.

Claims arising from injury to person and property may be united in one action.

APPEAL PROM GRAVES CIRCUIT COURT.

September 30, 1874.

Opinion by

Judge Pryor :

The right to a change of venue had been waived by reason of the continuance of the cause at a former term, and we are not disposed *101to adjudge that the court had no discretion on the subject, after the appellant had voluntarily consented that no change of venue would be applied for, in order to obtain a continuance. The plaintiff had the right, at any time prior to a decision thereon, to withdraw his motion for a new trial. This could not have prejudiced the appellant, as it not only had the opportunity, but did, in fact, make a similar motion by its counsel, the overruling of which by the court below is now complained of. Sec. hi, Code of Practice, expressly provides that claims arising from injury to person and property may be united in the same action.

*W. W. Tice, for appellant.*

*R. K. Williams, for appellee.*

There was no error in the instructions given. Judgment *affirmed.*
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 WorldQuest Networks, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, R. Stephen Polley, President and Chief Executive Officer 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, to the best of my 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 result of operations of
         the Company.



By:     /s/ R. Stephen Polley
   ----------------------------------------------
     Name:  R. Stephen Polley
     Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

March 6, 2003
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, J. DouglasRamsey, Chief Financial Officer of EXCO Resources, Inc., certify that:

1.                                       Ihave reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of EXCO Resources, Inc.;

2.                                       Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                                       Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

5.                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
| Date:  August 9, 2007 | /s/ J. DOUGLAS RAMSEY           |   |
|----------------------------|---------------------------------|--------|
|                       | J. Douglas Ramsey               |
|                       | Chief Financial Officer

  |

 

----
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 12

- 00257

- CR

MICHAEL GENTLE

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

From the 52nd District Court

Coryell County, Texas

Trial Court No. FAM

- 08

- 19640

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a).

We ha ve not issued a decision in this appeal , and Appellant personally signed the

motion. T he motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

REX D. DAVIS

JusticeGentle v. State Page 2

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis , and

Justice Scoggins

Dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed August 2, 2012

Do not publish

[ CR25 ]
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





Pursuant
to


18
U.S.C. Section 1350,


As
Adopted pursuant to


Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Zeynep
Hakimoglu, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
ClearOne Communications, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31,
2008, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of ClearOne Communications,
Inc.











Date:  May
      13, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Zeynep HakimogluZeynep
      HakimogluChairman,
      President and Chief Executive
Officer































A
signed original of the written statement above required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to ClearOne Communications, Inc.
and will be retained by ClearOne Communications, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.






1
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 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
  1)
    
    the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended July 2,
2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods covered
by the Report.
 /s/ Paul J. van der WansemPaul J. van der WansemPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of
Directors (principal executive officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND BALANCE SHEETS FOR DODGE CITY HEALTHCARE GROUP, L.P.
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,301
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,997
<INVENTORY>                                      1,215
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,637
<PP&E>                                          20,485
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,182
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  26,443
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              859
<BONDS>                                         10,740
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,844
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    26,443
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,737
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,383
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,819
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,841
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 619
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,677
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,677
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,677
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 32(2)

                                  CERTIFICATION

                PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
                OF 2002 (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350,
                    CHAPTER 63 TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Doral Financial Corporation, a Puerto Rico corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 (the "Form
l0-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section l3(a)or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.




Dated: August 13, 2003                        By: /s/ Richard F. Bonini
                                                  ------------------------------
                                            Name: Richard F. Bonini
                                           Title: Senior Executive Vice-
                                                   President and Chief
                                                   Financial Officer



This certification accompanies this Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the
liability of that Section.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to, and will be retained by, the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
OSPFv3_v1.2.html[3/30/18, 11:23:07 AM]

USGv6 Test Selection Tables*

OSPF-v3

F14-Interoperability: OSPF-v3-v1.2 

Applicable Profile: NIST SP 500-267 A profile for IPv6 in the U.S. Government - Version 1.0, July 2008.

Configuration Option: OSPF-v3 

Test Specification Id:

[OSPFv3-Interoperability] IPv6 OSPFv3 Interoperability Test Specification, version 1.3, November, 2010,

[editor: CHT-TL & NIST].

Reference:

[RFC 2328] J. Moy, OSPF Version 2, RFC 2328, April 1998

[RFC 2740] R. Coltun, D. Ferguson, J. Moy, A. Lindem, Ed., OSPF for IPv6, RFC 2740, December 1999

[RFC 4301] S. Kent, K. Seo, Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol, RFC 4301, December 2005

[RFC 4552] M. Gupta, N. Melam, Authentication/Confidentiality for OSPFv3, RFC 4552, June 2006

Device Type Definitions:

ROUTER: A device capable of forwarding packets.

HOST: A device which is not a ROUTER.

Interoperability Partner Requirements:

Any host or router claiming compliance with the USGv6 profile MUST demonstrate evidence of interoperability

with three or more independent implementations of IPv6. The three implementations must include at least one

Host and at least one Router.

Can not change Target nodes once testing has begun.

OSPFv3-Interoperability 

If your Device Under Test (DUT) Type is Router:

DUT = TR1 for all tests.

TR2 = Independent Implementation Device B

TR3 = Independent Implementation Device C

H1, H2 and H3 = Any devices which can execute ping6 function

OSPF-v3 Test Check List - REQUIRED

Reference Test Specification Id Test Number Device Type Passed

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3-Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_1_1 Router

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3-Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_1_2 Router

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3-Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_1_3 Router
OSPFv3_v1.2.html[3/30/18, 11:23:07 AM]

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_3_1 Router

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_3_2 Router

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_3_3 Router

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_4_1 Router

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_4_2 Router

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_4_3 Router

RFC 2328, RFC 2740 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_4_4 Router

RFC 4552, RFC 4301 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_5_1 (A) (B) Router

RFC 4552, RFC 4301 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_5_2 Router

OSPF-v3 Test Check List - SHOULD

Reference Test Specification Id Test Number Device Type Passed

RFC 4552, RFC 4301 OSPFv3 Interoperability OSPFv3_IOT_5_1 (C) Router

* The objective of this test selection sheet is to provide a reference for available test specifications that identifies tests

applicable to the USGv6 Profile.
#### Herod et al. *v.*The Duck Pond Ditching Association.

APPEAL from.the Hendricks Common Pleas.

C. *C. Nave*and *C. A. Nave,*for appellants.

*L. M. Campbell,*for appellee.

Osborn, C. J.

This case is in all respects similar to *Dobson*v. *The Duck Pond Ditching Association, ante,*p. 312. Under the ruling in that case, the judgment of the court below is affirmed.

The judgment of the said Hendricks Common Pleas is affirmed, with costs.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

MICHAEL STEPP )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION 05-0303-BH-C

 )

MIKE HALEY, et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to

the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Recommendation

to which objection is made (Docs. 75-77), the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge

made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court except to

the extent that the plaintiff will be allowed to submit herein an Amended Complaint

asserting claims associated solely with his present incarceration. The Court specifically

concludes that plaintiff’s re-incarceration does not alter the propriety of the dismissal of

his original complaint, as amended, inasmuch as plaintiff has failed to establish that such

re-incarceration was either likely to occur at the time the Report and Recommendation

issued or remotely related to his first incarceration. The Court will, however, permit the

plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint in view of the proximity of plaintiff’s reincarceration. 

Case 1:05-cv-00303-BH-C Document 78 Filed 05/30/06 Page 1 of 2
2

It is accordingly ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint be and is hereby

DISMISSED with prejudice, but that plaintiff is hereby permitted to file an Amended

Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on the proper form, provided such Amended

Complaint is filed no later than June 27, 2006. Should the plaintiff fail to timely file an

Amended Complaint on the proper form, this action shall be terminated and not thereafter

reinstated. The Clerk of this Court is directed to forward to the plaintiff the proper form

for filing a Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 together with a copy of this order.

DONE this 30th day of May, 2006.

 s/ W. B. Hand 

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00303-BH-C Document 78 Filed 05/30/06 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 243 (Thursday, December 18, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 75554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29762]


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

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the ``Government in the Sunshine 
Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation's Board of Directors met in open session at 10:02 
a.m. on Tuesday, December 16, 2014, to consider the following matters:

    Summary Agenda:

Disposition of minutes of previous Board of Directors' Meetings.
Memorandum and resolution re: Final Rule Integrating OTS and FDIC Flood 
Insurance Regulations.
Summary reports, status reports, and reports of actions taken pursuant 
to authority delegated by the Board of Directors.

    Discussion Agenda:

Memorandum and resolution re: Proposed 2015 Corporate Operating Budget.

    In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Vice 
Chairman Thomas M. Hoenig, seconded by Director Jeremiah O. Norton 
(Appointive), concurred in by Director Thomas J. Curry (Comptroller of 
the Currency), Director Richard Cordray (Director, Consumer Financial 
Protection Bureau), and Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, that Corporation 
business required its consideration of the matters on less than seven 
days' notice to the public; and that no earlier notice of the meeting 
than that previously provided on December 11, 2014, was practicable.
    The meeting was held in the Board Room temporarily located on the 
fourth floor of the FDIC Building located at 550 17th Street NW., 
Washington, DC.

    Dated: December 16, 2014.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-29762 Filed 12-16-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
#### N. B. Bortman *v.*James Giles.

Sale of Real Estate — Possession—Estoppel.

One who secures and holds possession of land under a parol contract to purchase, while so in possession is estopped to deny the title of one who thus contracts to sell to him and cannot set up a title acquired hy him while so in possession.

APPEAL PROM ADAIR CIRCUIT COURT.

October 14, 1876.

*Winfrey & Winfrey, for appellant. Stewart & Nell, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Cofer :

The evidence that the appellee took possession of the land in contest under the parol contract to purchase it of the appellant is conclusive and uncontradicted, and it also appeared in the evidence that he has continued in possession ever since. Having entered under the appellant, the appellee is estopped to deny his title, and cannot set up a title acquired by him while so in possession, but must surrender his possession and divest himself of the advantage gained by the possession received from the appellant, and when he does so, and the parties are in statu quo, he may in a suit test the relative strength of the title of himself ánd the appellant.

Wherefore the judgment is *reversed,*and the cause is remanded with directions to render judgment for the appellant, and to compel the surrender of the possession to him.