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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7070

In Re: RODNEY H. WILLIAMS, a/k/a Simon Andrew

Conrad, a/k/a Siothan Andrew Connor, a/k/a Rod

Williams, a/k/a Kenneth Gary Williams,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

(CR-01-231)

Submitted: September 27, 2005 Decided: October 4, 2005

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodney H. Williams, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Rodney H. Williams petitions for writ of mandamus. He

seeks an order requiring the district court judge presiding over

his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) proceeding to be recused. 

Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has

a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. &

Loan Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus

is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary

circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S.

394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).

Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re

United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).

Williams has failed to allege the extrajudicial bias

necessary to warrant recusal of the district judge. In re Beard,

811 F.2d at 827. Thus, his claim fails. Id. Accordingly, we deny

Williams’ motion to proceed in forma pauperis and his petition for

writ of mandamus. 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.

PETITION DENIED
665 A.2d 1105

#### MARY BRENNAN v. JOSEPH S. ORBAN, JR.

September 22, 1995.

ORDER

Leave to appeal is granted.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Frederick J. Erickson, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Bull Run Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 this quarterly report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this quarterly 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 this quarterly report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:  a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report
is being prepared;b)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as
of May 31, 2005 (the Evaluation Date) and presented in this quarterly report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; andc)
    
    disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants first fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors:  a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data; andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting. Date:
    
    July 14, 2005Signed:
    
    /s/ FREDERICK J. ERICKSONFrederick J. Erickson
Vice President  Finance and Chief Financial Officer
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 13A-14(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
                           AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sparta Commercial Services, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified
(the "Report"), the undersigned, Anthony L. Havens, as Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 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.

/s/ Anthony L. Havens
---------------------
Anthony L. Havens
Chief Executive Officer
Date: December 15, 2004
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3624 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3624

      To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to enhance 
disproportionate share hospital treatment for sole community hospitals 
                      under the Medicare program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 29, 2006

Mr. Burr (for himself and Mrs. Lincoln) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to enhance 
disproportionate share hospital treatment for sole community hospitals 
                      under the Medicare program.

    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 ``Helping Sole Community Hospitals Act 
of 2006''.

SEC. 2. ENHANCED DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE HOSPITAL TREATMENT FOR SOLE 
              COMMUNITY HOSPITALS UNDER THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

    Section 1886(d)(5)(F)(xiv)(II) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(5)(xiv)(II)), as amended by section 5003(d) of the 
Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-171), is amended by 
inserting ``or as a sole community hospital under subparagraph 
(D)(iii)'' before the period at the end.
                                 <all>
```
#### Delvin Sweeney, Respondent, v Bruckner Plaza Associates et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

Decided May 5, 2009

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
#### In the Matter of Milagro T., Appellant, v Manyolin G.P., Respondent.

[963 NYS2d 590]

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Stack, J.H.O.), dated May 1, 2012, which, sua sponte, dismissed the petition on the ground that the Family Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to appoint a guardian for the subject child.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings consistent herewith; and it is further,

Ordered that in the interim and until further order of the Family Court, Nassau County, the court’s temporary order of guardianship dated May 1, 2012, shall remain in effect.

The Family Court erred in, sua sponte, dismissing the instant guardianship petition on the ground that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Although a court of this state may not modify a child custody determination made by a court of another state “unless . . . [t]he court of the other state determines it no longer has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction ... or that a court of this state would be a more convenient forum” (Domestic Relations Law § 76-b [1]; *see Stocker v Sheehan,*13 AD3d 1, 6 [2004]), the record here does not contain any competent evidence demonstrating that there is an existing child custody determination that had been made by a court of another state *(cf. Matter of Calvo v Herring,*51 AD3d 916, 917 [2008]).

Furthermore, even if there was competent proof establishing the existence of an existing child custody determination that had been made by a court of another state, under the particular circumstances of this case, the Family Court erred in, sua sponte, dismissing the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without first considering whether it was appropriate to exercise temporary emergency jurisdiction pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 76-c *(see generally Matter of Callahan v Smith,*23 AD3d 957, 958-959 [2005]; *Matter of Woods v Woods,*56 AD3d 789, 791 [2008]).

Under these circumstances, the order appealed from must be reversed and the matter remitted to the Family Court, Nassau County. In the interim and until further order of the Family Court, Nassau County, the court’s temporary order of guardian*1053ship dated May 1, 2012, shall remain in effect.

Skelos, J.P., Angiolillo, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Elizabeth Garcia, Plaintiff-Appellant, <br><br>against<br><br>Leland Gardens Condo 1, Defendant-Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Plaintiff, as limited by her brief, appeals from that portion of a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Lyle E. Frank, J.), entered on or about September 27, 2018, after trial, which dismissed the main action.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Appeal from judgment (Lyle E. Frank, J.), entered on or about September 27, 2018, insofar as appealed from, held in abeyance and matter remanded to Civil Court for issuance of a decision in conformity with the requirements of CPLR 4213(b).</p><p>The trial court failed to comply with the specificity requirements of CPLR 4213(b) in rendering judgment in defendant's favor without setting forth its rationale or the facts essential to its determination. Inasmuch as this small claims action hinges in large measure upon issues of credibility raised by the parties' conflicting testimony, we hold the appeal in abeyance and remand the matter for issuance of a decision setting forth the essential facts as required by CPLR 4213(b) (<i>see Brenner v de Bruin</i>, 171 AD2d 833 [1991]; <a href="../2012/2012_50849.htm" target="_blank"><i>Ozzy Constr. Co. v Scott</i>, 35 Misc 3d 139</a>[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 50849[U][App Term, 1st Dept 2012]).</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: December 17, 2019<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
##### 



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 report on Form 10-K of Odyssey Re Holdings Corp. (the Company)
containing the financial statements of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the
Report) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Andrew A.
Barnard, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1.
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. /s/ CHARLES D. TROIANO
Charles D. Troiano
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer March 7, 2005 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Odyssey Re
Holdings Corp. and will be retained by Odyssey Re Holdings Corp. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
##### 



FORM 6-K SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549
 Report of Foreign Private Issuer Pursuant to Rule 13a-16 or 15d-16
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 For the month of March 2005 Commission File Number 1-14916 BROOKFIELD PROPERTIES CORPORATION  BCE Place
181 Bay Street
Suite 330
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M5J 2T3
(416) 359-8600
(Address of principal executive offices) Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover of Form
20-F or Form 40-F. Form 20-F o     Form 40-F þ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by
Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1): o Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by
Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7): o Indicate by check mark whether by furnishing the information contained in this Form, the registrant
is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yes o     No þ If Yes is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in connection with
Rule 12g3-2(b): 82- ___




---



##### 



SIGNATURES Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized. Date: March 31, 2005 Brookfield Properties CorporationBy:
    /s/ Craig J. LaurieName:
    Craig J. LaurieTitle:
    Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer




---



##### 



EXHIBIT LIST Exhibit
    
    Description99.1
    
    
    2005 Annual Report99.2
    
    
    Notice of Meeting99.3
    
    
    Management Proxy Circular99.4
    
    
    Form of Proxy
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-18-00191-CR

TODD PECK, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 102nd District Court

Bowie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 17F1221-102

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.
2

O R D E R

Our review of the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record in this case indicates that they 

contain “sensitive data” as that phrase is defined in Rule 9.10 of the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(a). Sensitive data includes “a birth date, a home address, and 

the name of any person who was a minor at the time the offense was committed.” TEX. R. APP.

P. 9.10(a)(3). The clerk’s record and volumes one, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, and fourteen 

of the reporter’s record contain the names of persons who were minors at the time the offense was 

committed. Rule 9.10(b) states, “Unless a court orders otherwise, an electronic or paper filing 

with the court, including the contents of any appendices, must not contain sensitive data.” TEX.

R. APP. P. 9.10(b).

Rule 9.10(g) provides, “A court may also order that a document be filed under seal in paper 

form or electronic form, without redaction.” TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(g). Therefore, because the 

clerk’s record and volumes one, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, and fourteen of the reporter’s 

record contain sensitive data, we order the clerk of this Court or her appointee, in accordance with 

Rule 9.10(g), to seal the electronically filed clerk’s record and volumes one, nine, ten, eleven, 

twelve, thirteen, and fourteen of the reporter’s record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: July 17, 2019
EXHIBIT 13.1






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


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the “Report”) for the purposes of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.




I, Alceu Duilio Calciolari, Chief Executive Officer of Gafisa S.A., certify that, to the best of my knowledge:




·
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.




Date: April 28, 2014




GAFISA S.A.By:
/s/ Alceu Duilio CalciolariName:
Alceu Duilio CalciolariTitle:
Chief Executive Officer
#### In the Matter of Tony L. McGee, Respondent, v Carolyn Patron, Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Carolyn Patron, Appellant, v Tony L. McGee, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.)

[869 NYS2d 917]

In related child custody proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Lynaugh, J.), dated December 5, 2007, as, after a hearing, granted the father’s petition to modify a prior custody order of the same court (James, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated May 18, 2000, awarding her sole custody of the parties’ child, so as to award him sole custody of the subject child, and dismissed her petition for permission to relocate to Maryland with the subject child.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Custody determinations depend to a great extent upon the hearing court’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and of the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parties *(see Matter of Brian S. v Stephanie P.,*34 AD3d 685, 686 [2006]; *Matter of James v Hickey,*6 AD3d 536, 537 [2004]). A determination of custody should not be set aside unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis in the record *(see Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167 [1982]). A court, in considering questions of child custody, must determine “what is for the best interest of the child” (Domestic Relations Law § 70 [a]; *see Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167 [1982]).

The hearing court may order a change in custody if the totality of the circumstances warrants a modification in the best interests of the child .(see *Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167 [1982]; *Matter of Brian S. v Stephanie P.,*34 AD3d 685, 686 [2006]). The Family Court’s determination that the best interests of the child would be served by a change of custody to the father was supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record and should not be disturbed *(see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56*NY2d 167 [1982]; *Matter of Timosa v Chase,*21 AD3d 1115, 1116 [2005]).

*634The mother’s remaining contention is without merit. Skelos, J.E, Dillon, McCarthy and Eng, JJ., concur.
**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**

 

 

 

I, Calli R. Bucci, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)Amendment #2 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Parallax Health Sciences, Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2018 (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 Parallax Health Sciences, Inc. 

 

 

 

 

 

*/s/ Calli R. Bucci* 

Calli R. Bucci 

Chief Financial Officer 

 

October 21, 2019 

 

 

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Parallax Health Sciences, Inc. and will be retained by Parallax Health Sciences, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 12 (Tuesday, January 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 2721]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00656]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel; Hip Fracture Trial.
    Date: February 5, 2015.
    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 
2C212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone 
Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Isis S. Mikhail, MPH, DRPH, National Institute 
on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2C212, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-7702, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f6bbbfbdbeb7bfbabfb69b979f9ad8989f9ed8919980"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="94d9dddfdcd5ddd8ddd4f9f5fdf8bafafdfcbaf3fbe2">[email protected]</span></a>.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: January 13, 2015.
Melanie J. Gray,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-00656 Filed 1-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>