alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### GROGAN v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO.

Civ. 4523.

United States District Court W. D. New York.

March 12, 1951.

See also, D.C., 10 F.R.D. 456.

Moule, Miles & Forhead, Buffalo, for plaintiff.

Adams, Smith, Brown & Starrett, Buffalo, for defendant.

KNIGHT, Chief Judge.

The plaintiff seeks to require the defendant to produce for their inspection a written statement made by one Mrs. Theodore Szybalski to the defendant concerning the plaintiff’s alleged accident.

In answer to interrogatories, the defendant stated that this witness, Mrs. Szy-balski, resided at 1630 Park Road, W., Apartment 402, Washington, D. C. The plaintiff, in her moving affidavit herein, asserts she has been unable to locate the said witness although extensive efforts were made by her representatives to do so, commencing on January 16, 1951. Plaintiff is advised that said witness moved from the address given over nine months ago and left no forwarding address.

Certainly before any order is made directing the production of the aforesaid' statement, the plaintiff must show in particular what efforts were made and by whom they were made to ascertain the present residence of this witness. Certainly the mere statement that the plaintiff has made “extensive efforts” is insufficient. See Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.

Motion denied.
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 on Form 10‐K of Fractyl Health, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2023 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I 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, as amended; and

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

|                     |     |                                                                                                             |
|---------------------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: April 1, 2024 | By: | /s/ Harith RajogaparanHarith Rajogaparan, M.D., Ph.D.Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer) |

 

 

 

 

 

----
#### Charles A. STANLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Scott GOODWIN; et al., DefendantsAppellees.

No. 06-16622.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 20, 2007.*

Filed Dec. 28, 2007.

Charles A. Stanley, Tutwiler, MS, pro se.

David S. Reidy, Esq., Reed Smith, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Steven B. Jacobson, Esq., Honolulu, HI, Mani Sheik, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

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

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Charles A. Stanley appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice, for failure to properly serve defendants, his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that various Sears & Roebuck employees used excessive force in apprehending him for shoplifting. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We may affirm on any ground supported by *787the record. *See, e.g., Cardenas v. Anzai,*311 F.3d 929, 938 (9th Cir.2002).

Dismissal was proper because Stanley’s amended complaint failed to allege state action, a necessary requirement for stating a claim for relief under section 1983. *See Jensen v. Lane County,*222 F.3d 570, 574 (9th Cir.2000) (holding section 1983 supports a claim only when the alleged injury is caused by state action and not by a merely private actor). The dismissal is with prejudice. *See Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc.,*316 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir.2003) (holding dismissal with prejudice is appropriate only when the complaint could not be saved by amendment).

Stanley’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Exhibit 31.1

Certification Pursuant to
Rule 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a), 
as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Gale E. Klappa, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Wisconsin Gas LLC;

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.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;

4.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 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 report is being prepared;

b)      Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c)      Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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(s) 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 (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)      All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:          March 7, 2006

/s/GALE E. KLAPPA                  Gale E. Klappa
                  Chief Executive Officer
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



The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the

Annual Report of Commerce Group Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the

fiscal year ended March 31, 2007 (the "Report") for the

purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of

1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the

United States Code.



I, Edward A. Machulak, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

of Commerce Group Corp., (the "Company"), 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.   the Form 10-K/A of the Company for the fiscal year ended

March 31, 2007, (the "Form 10-K/A"), 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 Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all

material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of

the Company.



Date:  July 14, 2008           /s/ Edward A. Machulak

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

Edward A. Machulak

Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 13.01

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Graña y Montero S.A.A. (the Company) on Form
20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Luis Francisco Díaz Olivero, Chief
Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (i) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. 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.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 15, 2018



/s/ Luis Francisco Díaz Olivero
Name: Luis Francisco Díaz Olivero Title: Chief Executive
Officer
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-1105V

UNPUBLISHED

JAMES MAHONEY, ESQ.,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran 

Filed: February 27, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU);

Ruling on Entitlement; Uncontested;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)

Steven Douglas Hillyard, Law Office of Steven D. Hillyard, APC, Newport Beach, CA, 

for petitioner.

Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On July 30, 2018, filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine 

Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2

(the “Vaccine Act”). 

Petitioner alleges that he suffered Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after receiving the 

influenza vaccination on September 12, 2017. Petition at 1, ¶ 2. Petitioner further 

alleges that he received the vaccination in the United States and neither he nor any 

other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for his GBS, alleged as 

vaccine caused. Id. at ¶¶ 2, 15-16. The case was assigned to the Special Processing 

Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 

required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the EGovernment Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to 

the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to 

redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of 

privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such 

material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

On February 27, 2020, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he states 

that he does not contest that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. 

Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent concedes “that petitioner 

has satisfied the criteria set forth in the recently revised Vaccine Injury Table (Table) 

and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation (QAI), which afford petitioner a 

presumption of causation if the onset of GBS occurs between three and forty-two days 

after a seasonal flu vaccination and there is no apparent alternative cause.” Id. at 8. 

In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that 

Petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
Exhibit 13.02

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Graña y Montero S.A.A. (the Company) on Form
20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mónica Miloslavich, Chief Financial
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley-Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (i) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. 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.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 15, 2018



/s/ Mónica Miloslavich
Name: Mónica Miloslavich Title: Chief Financial
Officer
Exhibit 13 . 1



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, each of the undersigned officers of KUBOTA CORPORATION (the Company), hereby certifies, to such
officers knowledge, that the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: September 21, 2004



/s/ Daisuke HatakakeDaisuke HatakakePresident and Representative Director(Chief Executive Officer)/s/ Yoshiharu NishiguchiYoshiharu NishiguchiDirector(Chief Financial Officer)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jhonni GALVES, also known as Johnny Mandez, also known as Jhonni Galvez, also known as Jhonni Osvaldo Galvez-Venega, also known as Jhonnie Galves-Venegas, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-20223

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 22, 2008.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARWOOD, WIENER and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jhonni Galves appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry into the United States after having been deported, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). Galves contends that the district court erred by imposing a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii) because his prior Texas conviction for aggravated assault is not a crime of violence under the Sentencing Guidelines. He contends that the Texas crime of aggravated assault has a broader definition than most other definitions of aggravated assault because it may be committed by threatening the victim with a weapon.

This court has previously held that aggravated assault under Texas Penal Code § 22.02 (Vernon 2002), which is identical to the 1997 version of the statute at issue in the instant case, is substantially similar to the generic, common sense definition of “aggravated assault” under the Guidelines. *See United States v. Guillen-Alvarez,*489 F.3d 197, 199-201 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*- U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 418, 169 L.Ed.2d 293 (2007). *See also United States v. Rojas-Gutierrez,*510 F.3d 545 (5th Cir.2007).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
Exhibit 32.2CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
 ACT OF 2002I, Edward A. Machulak, Executive Vice President and Secretary of
 Commerce Group Corp., (the Company), 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.       the Form 10-K of the Company for the
 fiscal year ended March 31, 2004, (the Form 10-K), 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 Form 10-K
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.
Date:  May 10, 2004      /s/ Edward A. Machulak
Edward A. Machulak      Executive Vice President,      and Secretary
EXHIBIT 23.2
  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
  We hereby consent to the use of our report dated April 29, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of NQA, Inc. for the years ended January 31, 2011 and 2010, included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) of National Technical Systems, Inc. for the year ended January 31, 2011.
  /s/ PKF, P.C.
 Boston, Massachusetts
 April 29, 2011


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 To the Board of Directors
 NQA, Inc.
 
 We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of NQA, Inc. (the “Company”) as of January 31, 2011 and 2010, and the related consolidated statements of income and retained earnings, and cash flows for the years then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
 
 We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  We were not engaged to perform an audit of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
 
 In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of NQA, Inc. as of January 31, 2011 and 2010, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
 
 /s/ PKF, P.C.
 April 29, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000887021
<NAME> LIGGETT GROUP INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,045
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,044
<INVENTORY>                                     37,793
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                50,578
<PP&E>                                          46,140
<DEPRECIATION>                                  28,852
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,198
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           97,870
<BONDS>                                        138,542
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (180,011)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,198
<SALES>                                        223,811
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               223,811
<CGS>                                          102,444
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  102,444
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (3,692)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,920
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,333)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,333)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,333)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-09-158-CV

CAROLYN LYNAM	APPELLANT	

	V.

DISCOVER BANK	APPELLEE

	----------

	FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

	On May 29, 2009, and again on June 15, 2009, we notified appellant, in accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $175 filing fee was paid.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).  Appellant has not paid the $175 filing fee.  See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

	Because appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court’s order of August 28, 2007,2 we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

	Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL:  MCCOY, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and MEIER, J.  

DELIVERED:  July 9, 2009