alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 November 25, 2013

h1118

Order 

Clerk

November 25, 2013

145863

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145863

COA: 305475

Oakland CC: 2011-235533-FC

JONATHAN VINCENT HUNTER,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

By order of November 20, 2012, the application for leave to appeal the July 24, 

2012 judgment of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in 

People v Hardy (Docket No. 144327) and People v Glenn (Docket No. 144979). On 

order of the Court, the cases having been decided on July 29, 2013, 494 Mich 430 (2013), 

the application is again considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby  consent to the  incorporation  by  reference  into the  Statement  of
Additional Information constituting part of this Post-Effective Amendment No. 36
to the registration statement on form N-1A (the "Registration Statement") of our
report dated May 22, 1999,  relating to the financial  statements  and financial
highlights  appearing  in the  April  30,  1999  Annual  Report  which  is  also
incorporated by reference into the  Registration  Statement.  We also consent to
the reference to us under the heading "Independent Accountants" in the Statement
of Additional Information.




PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
December 27, 1999
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Mike Green d/b/a Residential Inspections, and Craig Cunningham, Appellant

No. 06

- 18

- 00022

- CV v.

Southern County Mutual Insurance Company, Appellee Appeal from the 114th District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 15

- 2067

- B ). Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Morriss, Justice Moseley and Justice Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the joint motion of the parties to

dismiss the appea l by agreement should be granted. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We further order that each party shall bear its own costs of appeal.

RENDERED JULY 3, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Page 28

Exhibit 31.2  Certification of the Chief Financial Officer

Chief Financial Officer Certification
Pursuant To Section 302 Of 
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002

|I, Robert S. Johnson, certify that:
|-----------------------------------
|                                   
|1.                                 
|                                   
|2.                                 
|                                   
|3.                                 
|                                   
|4.                                 
|                                   
|                                   
|                                   
|                                   
|                                   
|                                   
|                                   
|5.                                 
|                                   
|                                   
|                                   
|                                   



|November 10, 2005 | /s/ Robert S. Johnson  
|----------------- | -----------------------
|                  | Robert S. Johnson      
|                  | Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1


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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2020 of Santander Holdings USA, Inc. (the "Company") as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Timothy Wennes, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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; and





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





/s/ Timothy WennesName: Timothy WennesTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer





November 6, 2020
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         (4,961)
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  235,761
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  7,700,618
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,931,418
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,931,418
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          127,465
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,803,953
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,931,418
<SALES>                                            862
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   862
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    862
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       862
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATION

I, Surendra Pai,certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Authentidate
Holding Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3. Intentionally omitted.

4. Intentionally omitted.

5. Intentionally omitted.

Date: December 27, 2005                          Name: /s/Surendra Pai
                                                       --------------------
                                                 Title: Chief Executive Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, for the use and benefit of TRIPLE S ALARM CO., INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. WESTFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 12-3030.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: April 9, 2013.

Filed: April 12, 2013.

Jeffrey Hines Moore, Friday & El-dredge, Little Rock, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

David A. Grace, Hardin *&*Grace, North Little Rock, AR, Anton J. Rupert, Evan G. E. Vincent, Crowe & Dunlevy, Oklahoma City, OK, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Triple S Alarm Co., Inc., appeals from the judgment of the District Court1 denying its motion for attorney fees and a penalty under Arkansas law or attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(b), in Triple S’s suit under the Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. § 3131. After careful de novo review of the record, *see United States v. Brummels,*15 F.3d 769, 771 (8th Cir.1994), and having considered the parties’ submissions on appeal, we agree with the District Court that Triple S was not entitled to the relief that it sought for the reasons explained in the court’s opinion.

Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
No. 1124.

#### Schreffler, doing business as Schreffler Steel & Supply Co., et al. *v.*Bowles, Price Administrator.

See *post,*p. 870.
Exhibit 31.1

I, Colin Baillie, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Arran Funding Limited;

2. Based on my knowledge, the information in this report, 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;

3. Based on my knowledge,  the distribution or servicing information required to
be provided  to the trustee by the  servicer  and trust cash  manager  under the
pooling and servicing,  or similar,  agreement,  for inclusion in this report is
included in this report; and

4. Based on my knowledge and a review of the  compliance by the servicer and the
trust cash manager of their obligations under the applicable agreements, each of
the servicer and the trust cash manager has complied with both its servicing and
cash management  obligations and minimum servicing and cash management standards
set forth in the applicable agreements.

Date: March 30, 2006

/s/ Colin Baillie
----------------------------------
Director, Finance, Cards Finance
The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, as Servicer and Trust Cash Manager
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, ROBERT ROSNER, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of First Cypress
Technologies, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2002 fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents
in all material respects the financial condition and results
of operations of First Cypress Technologies, Inc.




By:     /s/ ROBERT ROSNER
        ------------------------
        Robert Rosner, President
        and Chief Executive Officer

Date:   April 15, 2003
# 17SNR03_00

# image1.png
#### Lanier *v.*Ratcliff.

Simmons, C. J. — The plaintiff in *certiorari*having on December 17th, 1892, applied for and obtained the judge’s sanction of the petition for *certiorari,*and having on the same day filed the petition in the clerk’s office, and the *certiorari*having been issued in due time and made returnable to the next term of the superior court, the case stood for trial at the May term, 1893, of that court; and the mere failure of the clerk to date the writ of *certiorari*afforded no excuse to the plaintiff in *certiorari*for failing to give the defendant in *certiorari*the notice required by law, that the same was returnable to and stood for a hearing at the term last mentioned. Accordingly there was no error in dismissing the *certiorari*for want of such notice.

January 14,1895.

*Certiorari.*Refore Judge Roney. Burke superior court. December term, 1893.

The case was tried in the justice’s court on November 17th, 1892. The petition for *eertiorari*was sanctioned on December 17, and filed in the clerk’s office of the superior court of Bui’ke county on the same day. The clerk issued the writ of *eertiorari,*directing the magistrate to certify and send up the proceedings “to the next May term of said superior court.” This writ was not dated. On the first day of the May term, 1893, the magistrate filed his answer. The case was not heard at that term. On September 23, 1893, defendant caused plaintiff to be served with written notice of the sanction of the writ and the filing of the answer, further stating that the case “will be heard and determined in vacation by H. O. Roney, judge of the superior courts of the Augusta circuit, at his office in Augusta, G-a., or at such *550place as lie may determine upon ten days notice to parties litigant or tlieir attorneys, as provided by an order passed by the judge of the superior court presiding in said Burke county on May 24th, 1893; or if not heard in pursuance of said order, it will be heard at the courthouse of said Burke county during the December term, 1893, of the superior court of said county, or at such other time and place as said court may direct.” The *certiorari*was dismissed for want of due notice of sanction and of time and place of hearing. The order of dismissal was assigned as error, because: (1) It did not appear from the writ that the *certiorari*was returnable to the May term, 1893, and the notice was given in time for the December term, 1893. (2) The answer not being filed till the May term, 1893, the case could not be heard at that term, and notice was not necessary until the time for hearing had been determined.

*549
      *Judgment affirmed.*

*550E. H. Callaway, for plaintiff in error.

Johnston & Brinson, *contra.*
Opinion issued October 15, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-19-00099-CR

———————————

JARVIS MARQUIS TILLMAN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 185th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1580017

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Jarvis Marquis Tillman, has filed three pro se letter-motions to 

dismiss, stating that he would like to dismiss his appeal upon receipt of this letter 

and to expedite the mandate. The Court construes the letter-motions filed by 
2

appellant as a motion to dismiss his appeal and to expedite the mandate. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.2(a), 18.1(c). Ten days have passed with no response. See TEX. R. APP. P.

10.3(a). No opinion has issued. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a).

Although appellant’s motion to dismiss is only signed by the pro se appellant 

and does not contain a certificate of service or conference, it was filed after 

appellant’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw with an Anders brief, both 

of which contain counsel’s signature, and after the State filed a waiver of its right to 

respond to the Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Thus, 

construing the various motions together with the State’s waiver, we conclude that 

good cause exists to suspend the operation of Rules 10.1, 18.1(a), and 42.2(a) in this 

appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 2, 10.1(a), 18.1(a), 42.2(a); see also Selph v. State, No. 

01-16-00776-CR, 2017 WL 2375788, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 1, 

2017, no pet.).

Accordingly, we grant appellant’s motion and dismiss this appeal. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.2(a), 43.2(f). Further, because the motion to expedite demonstrates 

good cause to expedite issuance of the mandate, we grant the motion and direct the 

clerk of this Court to issue the mandate immediately. See TEX. R. APP. P. 18.1(c).

We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes and Lloyd.
3

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
**THRIVENT MUTUAL FUNDS**
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ANDPRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of PALIGENT INC. (the “Company”) for thequarterly period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Salvatore A. Bucci, as ChiefExecutive Officer and principal financial officer of the Company, herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  August  8, 2003 | by:    | /s/ Salvatore A. Bucci                |   |
|-----------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|                        |   | Salvatore A. Bucci                    |
|                        |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|                        |   | (Principal Financial Officer)         |

 

Thiscertification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes ofSection 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

----
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-30839 Conference Calendar

__________________ EDDY L. BEVINS; EDWARD F. BEVINS, Plaintiffs, EDWARD F. BEVINS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus GLYNN D. ROBERTS ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CV-39
- - - - - - - - - - February 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Edward F. Bevins (Bevins) is the only plaintiff to appeal the dismissal of this suit. Eddy Bevins did not sign the notice of appeal and did not respond to the clerk of court's inquiry whether he wished to appeal. See Mikeska v. Collins , 928 F.2d 126, 126-27 (5th Cir. 1991). The complaint does not allege thatNo. 95-30839 -2- Bevins suffered an injury because of any defendants' conduct; thus, he lacked standing in the district court and he lacks standing to appeal. Bevins is not entitled to relief based on an alleged violation of his adult son's constitutional rights. Hang On, Inc. v. City of Arlington , 65 F.3d 1248, 1251 (5th Cir. 1995). APPEAL DISMISSED.
Exhibit 4.4
  English
    Translation of Chinese Original
  Crude Oil
    Mutual Supply
    Framework Agreement for Year 2011
  between
 PetroChina Company Limited
 and
 China Petrochemical Corporation
 Beijing
 January 2011




---



##### 



Crude Oil
    Mutual Supply Framework Agreement for Year 2011
    I.
    Mutual
    Supply and Cross Supply of Crude Oil    equal-amount
    II.
    Quality
    of Crude Oil    III.  Quarterly
    Supply Agreements; Sales and Purchase Contracts on an
    Enterprise-by-Enterprise
    Basis
    IV.
    Price of
    Crude Oil   1




---



##### 



V.
    Payment
    Guarantee    VI.
    Miscellaneous      Planning Department,
    PetroChina Company Limited

Production Management Department, 
    China Petrochemical CorporationBy: /s/  WU
    Mei

By: /s/  YU
    RenmingDate: January 12, 2011

Date: January 12, 2011  2
86

Table 31. Labor force status of people 16 to 24 years old by school enrollment, sex, and educational 

attainment, October 2010

(Numbers in thousands)

Enrolled in school............................... 22,021 8,491 38.6 7,065 32.1 1,426 16.8 13,530 

 Women.............................................11,258 4,666 41.4 3,942 35.0 723 15.5 6,592 

 Men................................................. 10,764 3,826 35.5 3,123 29.0 703 18.4 6,938 

 Enrolled in high school 1

...........................9,598 2,120 22.1 1,509 15.7 611 28.8 7,478 

 Women............................................. 4,622 1,117 24.2 822 17.8 296 26.5 3,505 

 Men................................................. 4,976 1,003 20.1 687 13.8 315 31.4 3,973 

 Enrolled in college.................................12,423 6,372 51.3 5,556 44.7 815 12.8 6,052 

 Women............................................. 6,635 3,548 53.5 3,121 47.0 428 12.1 3,087 

 Men................................................. 5,788 2,823 48.8 2,436 42.1 388 13.7 2,965 

Not enrolled in school......................... 15,928 12,653 79.4 10,281 64.5 2,371 18.7 3,275 

 Women................................................7,565 5,657 74.8 4,670 61.7 987 17.5 1,908 

 Less than a high school diploma ............ 1,192 653 54.8 448 37.6 205 31.4 538 

 High school graduates, no college 2

 ....... 3,036 2,114 69.6 1,622 53.4 492 23.3 922 

 Some college or associate's degree .........2,005 1,633 81.4 1,461 72.8 172 10.6 372 

 Bachelor’s degree and higher ................. 1,333 1,256 94.3 1,139 85.5 117 9.3 76 

 Men.................................................... 8,362 6,996 83.7 5,612 67.1 1,384 19.8 1,367 

 Less than a high school diploma ............ 1,625 1,164 71.6 842 51.8 322 27.7 461 

 High school graduates, no college 2 ....... 3,963 3,293 83.1 2,579 65.1 714 21.7 670 

 Some college or associate's degree .........1,926 1,745 90.6 1,475 76.6 269 15.4 181 

 Bachelor’s degree and higher ................. 849 794 93.6 715 84.3 79 9.9 55 

Characteristic

 Civilian 

noninstitutional 

population 

 Civilian labor force 

 Not in 

labor 

Total force 

Percent 

of 

population 

 Employed Unemployed 

Total

Percent 

of 

population 

Total

Percent 

of labor 

force

 1 Includes a small number of people enrolled in grades below high school. 

 2 Includes high school diploma or equivalent.

 NOTE: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. 

 SOURCE: October 2010 School Enrollment Supplement to the Current Population Survey, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

86
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the reference to our firm in the headnote to the Selected
Financial Data included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 1) for
the year ended December 31, 2000 and to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-47646) pertaining to the 1996 Stock
Plan (as amended), 2000 Director Option Plan, 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,
2000 Stock Plan and options to purchase Series E Preferred Stock; and the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-55504) pertaining to the 2000 Stock
Plan of our report dated January 24, 2001, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Microtune, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-
K/A Amendment No. 1) for the year ended December 31, 2000.


Dallas, Texas
November 5, 2001