alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

No. 98-40213

Summary Calendar

_________________________________

MICHAEL A. MCCANN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

JOE KING, Sheriff; CLARENCE BALL, Agent; INTERNAL REVENUE

SERVICE,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(G-97-CV-673)

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

March 22, 1999

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit

Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Michael A. McCann appeals from the judgment of the

district court dismissing his action against the Internal

Revenue Service (“IRS”) and an IRS revenue agent. On

appeal, he contends that the district court erred in failing

to remand to state court his action for replevin which he

had originally filed in the state court. McCann’s appeal

and the arguments contained in his brief are not only devoid
2

of merit, but are wholly frivolous. It is firmly

established and beyond dispute that because McCann brought

his suit in state court against a federal officer and a

federal agency, it was removable under 28 U.S.C. § 1442. 

The fact that federal law prohibits a replevin action for

the return of property seized pursuant to federal revenue

laws is not germane to the issue of removability. Appellant

confuses the non-availability of a remedy with the

jurisdiction of the federal court to declare that no such

remedy is available under the law. The remedy McCann seeks

is not available in any court, not simply the federal

courts. See 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a).

The judgment of the district court is affirmed and the

appellees request for sanctions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1912

and Rule 38 is granted. In addition to costs, damages in

the amount of $2,000 are adjudged against the appellant.

AFFIRMED, SANCTIONS ORDERED.
**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C SECTION 1350,**

**AS        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF        2002**

| Dated:                  March                  1, 2007 | By:                  /s/    | William                  L. Marks         |
|--------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
|                                                   |                                  | William                  L. Marks         |
|                                                   |                                  | Chief                  Executive Officer  |
|                                                   |                                  |                                      |
|                                                   |                                  |                                      |
|                                                   |                                  |                                      |
| Dated:                  March                  1, 2007 | By:/s/                      | Thomas                  L. Callicutt, Jr. |
|                                                   |                                  | Thomas                  L. Callicutt, Jr. |
|                                                   |                                  | Chief                  Financial Officer  |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CINEMARK 
USA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES MARCH 31, 1997, FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      15,778,562
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,531,224
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,732,269
<PP&E>                                     476,501,504
<DEPRECIATION>                              78,474,686
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             463,845,844
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       49,345,131
<BONDS>                                    227,606,967
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    49,536,725
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,645,037
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               463,845,844
<SALES>                                    102,982,244
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           102,982,244
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               86,416,596
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           7,417,599
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              9,586,016
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,472,809
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,113,207
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,113,207
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    27.21
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, 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.

 August 9, 2016

jam

Order 

Clerk

August 9, 2016

154200 (23)

DAVID ANTHONY VILLARREAL, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 154200

COA: 331633

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS/DIRECTOR, 

Defendant-Appellee.

___________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it 

is DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be 

liable for filing fees. 

Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall pay to the 

Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $58.00, shall submit a copy of this order 

with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned 

with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall result in the appeal not being 

filed in this Court.

If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly 

payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of 

the deposits made to plaintiff’s account until the payments equal the balance due of 

$317.00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in civil 

actions in this Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full. 

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and 

return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order.
<PAGE>

                                                                   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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending
June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report") of Nuveen Investments, Inc. (the "Company") and pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, the undersigned, as President of the Company, hereby certifies that:

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

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

Dated as of this 8th day of August 2006.


                                        /s/ John P. Amboian
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        John P. Amboian
                                        President

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ADONAY REMBERTO ORTIZ,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 06-74882

Agency No. A090-137-988

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 14, 2010** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Adonay Remberto Ortiz, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen removal

FILED

JAN 06 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 06-74882

proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. 

Ghahremani v. Gonzales, 498 F.3d 993, 999 (9th Cir. 2007) (court has jurisdiction

over mixed question of law and fact, as long as the relevant underlying facts are

not disputed). We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. 

 Lo v. Ashcroft, 341 F.3d 934, 937 (9th Cir. 2003). We grant the petition for

review and remand. 

The BIA abused its discretion in denying Ortiz’s motion for failure to

comply with the requirements of Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA

1988), where it is undisputed that Ortiz’s attorneys’ staff told him that he need not

appear at the January 19, 2006, hearing and where Ortiz explained why he did not

file a disciplinary complaint against his attorneys. See Lo, 341 F.3d at 937-38

(strict compliance not required where it is undisputed that attorney’s office staff

told petitioner the wrong hearing date, where petitioner explained absence of bar

complaint, and where Lozada’s policy goals to discourage baseless claims and

collusion were met). 

We therefore grant the petition for review and remand to the BIA for further

proceedings consistent with this disposition. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
Exhibit 13.1

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 on Form 20-F of Unilever N.V., a
corporation organized under the laws of The Netherlands (the Company) for the period ending December 31, 2013as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the
undersigned officers 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:

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.

Dated: 4 March 2014



|                                                             
|-------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Paulus Gerardus Josephus Maria Polman                    
|Paulus Gerardus Josephus Maria Polman Chief Executive Officer
|                                                             
|Dated: 4 March 2014                                          
|                                                             
|/s/ Raoul Jean-Marc Sidney Huet                              
|Raoul Jean-Marc Sidney Huet
Chief Financial Officer
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## N AVY



## – M ARINE 

## C ORPS 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS

_________________________ No

. 201 600270

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v.


### MAT HEW M. HURTADO Sergeant (E

- 5 ), United States Marine Corps

Appellant

________________________ _ Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: Lieutenant Colonel Eugene H. Robinson, Jr., USMC

. For Appellant : C ommander R.D. Evans, Jr., JAGC, USN

.

For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________ Decided 27 October 2016

_________________________ Before C AMPBELL , RUGH , and H UTCHISON , Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence as ap proved by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL Clerk of Court
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 Annual Report of Aerosonic Corporation, (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Douglas J. Hillman, 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:

(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.

|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                                                          |  | 
|------------------ |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|                   |  |  | 
|Dated: May 3, 2010 |  |  |  | By: |  | /S/ DOUGLAS J. HILLMAN                                  
|                   |  |  |  |     |  | Douglas J. Hillman
President and Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the
extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.1



















CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO




18 U.S.C. § 1350,




AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002














In connection with the Quarterly Report of IntegraMed America, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jay Higham, 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 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 consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company.










By:
/s/ Jay HighamJay Higham

Chief Executive Officer



November 9, 2010
Sommer Barnard Attorneys, PC 

March 29, 2006

Saturna Investment Trust  C/O Saturna Capital  1300 North State Street  Bellingham, Washington 98225-4730

 
> 
Re: Amendment to Form N-1A

 

Gentlemen:  In accordance with the registration of an indefinite number of units (“Units”)  registered by Saturna Investment Trust (the “Trust”) for its Funds,  we have been asked to provide the opinion of counsel required to be filed as  an exhibit to the Trust’s registration statement on Form N-1A (the “Registration  Statement”). In rendering this opinion, we have examined such documents  (including the audited financial statements of the Funds as of November 30,  2005), records and questions of law as we deemed it necessary to examine for  the purpose of this opinion. Based on that examination and investigation, it  is our opinion that the Units will be, upon issuance, validly issued, fully  paid and not liable to further assessments.

We consent to the filing of this letter as an exhibit to Post Effective      Amendment No. 26 to the Registration Statement.

Sincerely,

SOMMER BARNARD PC  /s/Sommer Barnard PC

 

 

----

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We consent to the references to our firm in the Registration Statement,      (Form N-1A), and related Statement of Additional Information of the Saturna      Investment Trust and to the inclusion of our report dated January 3, 2006      to the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of the Sextant Short-Term Bond      Fund, Sextant Bond Income Fund, Sextant Growth Fund, Sextant International      Fund and Idaho Tax Exempt Fund, each a series of the Saturna Investment      Trust. 

 
> 
TAIT, WELLER & BAKER LLP

 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  March 29, 2006
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

APPOINTMENT OF THE CHAIR OF THE
LEGISLATIVE REAPPORTIONMENT
COMMISSION :

:

:

:

:

: NO. 549

Judicial Administration Docket

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 3 rd day of Ma y , 202 1

, pursuant to Article II, Section 17(b) of the

Pennsylvania Constitution, Mark A. Nordenberg of Allegheny County is hereby appointed

as Chair of th e Pennsylvania Legislative Reapportionment Commission.
**Exhibit 10.19**

**NINTH AMENDMENT**

**TO**

**EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT**

This Ninth Amendment to Employment Agreement ismade and entered into effective as of December 10, 2008, by and between **WATSCO, INC.,** a Florida corporation (hereinafter called the “Company”), and **ALBERT H. NAHMAD**(hereinafter called the “Employee”).

**RECITALS**

**WHEREAS**, the Company and the Employee entered into an Employment Agreement effective as of January 31, 1996 (the “Employment Agreement”) pursuant to which the Employee renders certain services to the Company; and

**WHEREAS,** the Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors amended the Employment Agreement effective as ofJanuary 1, 2001, January 1, 2002, January 1, 2003, January 1, 2004, January 1, 2005, January 1, 2006, January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2008; and ****

**WHEREAS**, the Company and the Employee now desire to amend the Employment Agreement to make certain modifications thereunder. 

**NOW**, **THEREFORE**, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth in this Ninth Amendment, and other good and valuableconsideration, the parties to this Ninth Amendment agree as follows: 

1. All capitalized terms in this Ninth Amendment shall have the samemeaning as in the Employment Agreement, unless otherwise specified. 

2. Section 6 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended toread as follows: 

“6. EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT.

Upon submission of proper proof of payment by Employee, the Company will reimburse him for all reasonable expenditures for business travelor entertainment made by him in the course of and pursuant to the business of the Company, and reimbursements of any amounts that may be taxable to Employee are to be made prior to the end of the year following the year in which the expenses areincurred.” 

3. Paragraph B of Section III to Exhibit A of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: 

“B. *Payment of Performance Based Compensation.* Performance BasedCompensation shall be paid to the Executive on or before the March 15th that immediately follows the end of the year for which it is payableand the Compensation Committee shall certify that the performance goals have been met prior to such payment.” 

4. All other terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement shall remain the same. 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, the parties have caused this Ninth Amendment to be duly executed effective as of the day and year first above written.

 
**COMPANY:**WATSCO, INC.By: 
/s/ Barry S. Logan
 Barry S. Logan, Senior Vice President**EMPLOYEE:**
/s/ Albert H. Nahmad
Albert H. Nahmad
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 159 (Friday, August 18, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 39432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17506]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank 
or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank 
holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the 
notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than September 5, 2017.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant 
Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Aaron T. Boyken, individually, and together as a group acting in 
concert with the Allan J. Boyken Revocable Bank Stock Trust, with Allan 
J. Boyken as trustee; the F. Joy Boyken 2010 Trust, with Allan J. 
Boyken as trustee; and the F. Joy Boyken Revocable Bank Stock Trust, 
with F. Joy Boyken as trustee, all of Titonka, Iowa; to acquire voting 
shares of Titonka Bancshares, Inc. and thereby acquire shares of 
Titonka Savings Bank, both of Titonka, Iowa.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Brendan S. Murrin, 
Assistant Vice President) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
55480-0291:
    1. Brian Solsrud, North Oaks, Minnesota; to acquire shares of 
Flathead Lake Bancorporation, Inc., Polson, Montana, and thereby 
indirectly control First Citizens Bank of Polson, National Association, 
Polson, Montana.


    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 15, 
2017.
Yao-Chin Chao,
Assistant Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2017-17506 Filed 8-17-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P