alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2938 

AN ACT 

To extend the deadline for commencement of construction 

of a hydroelectric project. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2938 EH

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding the time period 

3 specified in section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 

4 U.S.C. 806) that would otherwise apply to the Federal En5 ergy Regulatory Commission project numbered 12187, the 

6 Commission may, at the request of the licensee for the 

7 project, and after reasonable notice, in accordance with 

8 the good faith, due diligence, and public interest require9 ments of that section and the Commission’s procedures 

10 under that section, extend the time period during which 

11 the licensee is required to commence the construction of 

12 the project for up to 3 consecutive 2-year periods from 

13 the date of the expiration of the extension originally issued 

14 by the Commission. 

15 (b) REINSTATEMENT OF EXPIRED LICENSE.—If the 

16 period required for commencement of construction of the 

17 project described in subsection (a) has expired prior to the 

18 date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission may 

19 reinstate the license effective as of the date of its expira20 tion and the first extension authorized under subsection 

21 (a) shall take effect on the date of such expiration. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 22, 2009. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2938 

AN ACT 

To extend the deadline for commencement of 

construction of a hydroelectric project.
#### In the Matter of Cameron K. Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent; Samuel Martin, Appellant, et al., Respondent.

[987 NYS2d 611]

In a child neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (Wolff, J.), dated August 15, 2013, which denied his motion to vacate an order of fact-finding and disposition of the same court dated May 18, 2012, which, upon his default in appearing at the continuation of the fact-finding hearing, and after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that he derivatively neglected the subject child and, inter alia, placed the subject child in the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services of Richmond County.

Ordered that the order dated August 15, 2013, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the father’s motion to vacate an order of fact-finding and disposition entered upon his failure to appear at the continuation of the fact-finding hearing. In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, a parent or other person legally responsible for a child’s care not present at the hearing of the petition may move to vacate an order of disposition and schedule a rehearing. “Such motion shall be granted on an affidavit showing ... a meritorious defense to the petition, unless the court finds that the parent or other person wilfully refused to appear at the hearing, in which case the court may deny the motion” (Family Ct Act § 1042; *see Matter of Tahanie S. [Ramon A.],*97 AD3d 751, 753-754 [2012]).

Here, the father failed to show a meritorious defense to the petition. Contrary to the father’s contentions, the nature of his neglect evidenced “fundamental flaws in [his] understanding of the duties of parenthood,” and a derivative finding of neglect is justified because the prior finding “was so proximate in time to the derivative proceeding . . . that it can reasonably be concluded that the condition still exists” *(Matter of Hannah UU.,*300 AD2d 942, 944 [2002] [internal quotation marks omitted]; *see Matter of Amber C.,*38 AD3d 538, 540 [2007]).

Skelos, J.E, Dillon, Roman and Maltese, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                        CONSENT OF KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP
 
The Board of Directors
Medirisk, Inc.
 
     We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-28541) on Form S-8 of Medirisk, Inc. of our reports dated February 6, 1998,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Medirisk, Inc. and subsidiaries
as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders' equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of the years
in the three-year period ended December 31, 1997, and the related financial
statement schedule, which reports appear in the 1997 annual report on Form 10-K
of Medirisk, Inc.
 
                                               /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP
 
Atlanta, Georgia
April 29, 1998
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code)
  (a)
    
    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter and nine months
ended September 30, 2005 (the Report) of the Company fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(b)
    
    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
 December 5, 2005
    
    /s/ Charles R. WaldronCharles R. WaldronSenior Vice President, Chief FinancialOfficer and Treasurer
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sunterra Corporation on Form 10-Q for
the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nicholas J. Benson, President
and Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss.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.

/s/ Nicholas J. Benson
----------------------
August 14, 2002
(December 30, 1997)

#### Bradford Applegate, Appellant, v Charles S. Hirsch et al., Respondents.

[665 NYS2d 903]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), entered October 17, 1994, which denied the application to direct respondent to turn over certain autopsy records and granted the cross motion to dismiss the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The records of the autopsy performed by the Office of the New York City Chief Medical Examiner are exempt from disclosure under New York City Charter § 557 (g). *Matter of Diaz v Lukash*(82 NY2d 211), relied upon by petitioner, does not require such disclosure, inasmuch as the petitioner in *Diaz*was not seeking records from a Medical Examiner in New York City *(see, Matter of Mitchell v Borakove,*225 AD2d 435, *appeal dismissed*88 NY2d 919). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Wallach and Nardelli, JJ.
Order entered November 24, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00927-CV

IN RE NATHAN NATHANIEL RENDER, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F08-45177-TU

ORDER

Before Justices Myers, Molberg, and Evans

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s October 21, 

2020 petition for writ of mandamus.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
**Exhibit32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofSRS Labs, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31,2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Thomas C.K. Yuen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Date: May 16, 2005 |   |                     |
|--------------------|--------|--------------------------|
|               | By:    | /s/ Thomas C.K.  Yuen    |
|               |   | Thomas C.K. Yuen         |
|               |   | Chief Executive  Officer |

 

----
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 22-1864

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

HASSAN ABBAS,

Defendant, Appellant.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court, issued on April 29, 2024, is 

amended as follows:

On page 6, line 20, delete the comma after "LLC".

On page 30, line 22, underline the "s" in "Mankarious".
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

R. DAVID AND SHERRI P. MITCHELL

v.

MEGILL HOMES, INC., MEGILL HOMES, LLC.,MISTY MEADOWS HOMES, INC., WAYNE C. MEGILL, SCOTT M. MEGILL,

AND BARBARA A. MEGILL

PETITION OF: MISTY MEADOWS HOMES, INC., AND MEGILL HOMES, INC. :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 534 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 8th day of March, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
#### BALWINDER SINGH MALHI, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-73279.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.*

Filed March 15, 2011.

Paul Shearman Allen, Esquire, Brian W. Shaughnessy, Esquire, Law Firm of Paul Allen & Associates, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.

Richard M. Evans, Esquire, Assistant Director, Allen W. Hausman, Esquire, *725OIL, Andrew Jacob Oliveira, Esquire, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Balwinder Singh Malhi, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo questions of law. *Iturribarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Malhi’s motion to reopen as time- and number-barred because the successive motion was filed more than three years after the BIA’s June 10, 2003, order dismissing his underlying appeal. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2) (only one motion to reopen permitted and the motion generally must be filed within 90 days of the final order). It follows that Malhi’s due process claim fails. *See Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring error and prejudice for a petitioner to prevail on a due process claim).

Malhi’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

We deny Malhi’s motion to supplement the record, *see*8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A), and we deny respondent’s motion to dismiss.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
ERVIN JAMES HORTON,

Appellant,

v.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-1351

_____________________________/

Opinion filed May 5, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County.

Paul S. Bryan, Judge.

Ervin James Horton, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and William W. Gwaltney, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, WETHERELL, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       4,832,334
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               20,805,265
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    554,546
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            34,908,334
<PP&E>                                      13,596,865
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,521,967
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              62,358,202
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,938,610
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,015
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,926,099
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                62,358,202
<SALES>                                     79,077,237
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            79,077,237
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               63,994,091
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (145,917)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,727,256
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             13,501,807
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,061,158
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         12,440,649
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                12,440,649
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .73
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .73
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of David E. Parker, an Attorney, Respondent.

[858 NYS2d 615]

Order of suspension entered pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (f) and (g). Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Smith, Centra, Peradotto and Gorski, JJ. (Filed May 21, 2008.)
Exhibit 31.01




SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION






I, Gary Herman, Chief Executive Officer of Digital Creative Development Corporation., certify that:




1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 of Digital Creative Development Corporation.




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 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)) and internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) 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)  Not applicable (X-13)




(c)  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




(d)  Disclosed in the 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 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: June 28, 2011
/s/ Gary HermanGary HermanPresident
 
 .
Exhibit 32.1
 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer 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 Entheos Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on the Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Antonino Cacace, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 (i)        the Report filed by the Company 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 that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company on the dates and for the periods presented therein.
 
 ENTHEOS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.Date: November 15, 2010

By:
/s/ Antonino CacaceAntonino Cacace

President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director
 
 This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not 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, 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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Motion for Rehearing Granted, Memorandum Opinion filed July 11, 2013 ,

Withdrawn, Appeal Reinstated, and Order filed October 1, 2013

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 0055 6

- CR NO. 14

- 13

- 0055 7

- CR NO. 14

- 13

- 0055 8

- CR

____________

IN RE TODD WARREN AL TSCHUL , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF Mandamus 23rd District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 23,557



### ORDER
On June 26, 2013, relator filed a petition for writ of m andamus in this Court asking this Court to compel the Honorable Ben Hardin, presiding judge of the 23rd District Court of Brazoria County to rule on his motion for a judgment nunc pro tunc for appeal time credit. On July 11 , 201 3 , this court issued an opinion denying relator’s petit ion for writ of mandamus

. A ppellant filed a motion for rehearing. A response was requested b ut none has been filed. The motion is GRANTED

.

### This court’s opinion filed July 11, 2013 , i s WITHDRAWN

. The original

proceeding is ordered REINSTATED. Respondent is requested to file a response to relator’s petition for writ of
mandamus on or before October 16, 2013

. PER CURIAM
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 Alabama National BanCorporation (Alabama
National) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), John H. Holcomb, III, Chief Executive Officer of Alabama National, and
William E. Matthews, V, Chief Financial Officer of Alabama National, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:

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

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



|                          
|--------------------------
|Dated: March 15, 2006     
|                          
|/s/ John H. Holcomb, III  
|John H. Holcomb, III      
|Chief Executive Officer   
|                          
|/s/ William E. Matthews, V
|William E. Matthews, V    
|Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
                    The Schedule contains summary financial 
                    information extracted from the financial
                    statements for Diversified Futures
                    Trust I and is qualified in its entirety 
                    by reference to such financial statements
</LEGEND>

<RESTATED>          

<CIK>               0000926805
<NAME>              Diversified Futures Trust I
<MULTIPLIER>        1

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1998

<PERIOD-START>                  Jan-1-1998

<PERIOD-END>                    Dec-31-1998

<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-Mos

<CASH>                          55,481,234

<SECURITIES>                    6,197,212

<RECEIVABLES>                   8,874

<ALLOWANCES>                    0

<INVENTORY>                     0

<CURRENT-ASSETS>                61,687,320

<PP&E>                          0

<DEPRECIATION>                  0

<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  61,687,320

<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           2,749,321

<BONDS>                         0

<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0

<PREFERRED>                     0

<COMMON>                        0

<OTHER-SE>                      58,937,999

<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    61,687,320

<SALES>                         0

<TOTAL-REVENUES>                9,529,178

<CGS>                           0

<TOTAL-COSTS>                   0

<OTHER-EXPENSES>                7,188,442

<LOSS-PROVISION>                0

<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0

<INCOME-PRETAX>                 0

<INCOME-TAX>                    0

<INCOME-CONTINUING>             0

<DISCONTINUED>                  0

<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0

<CHANGES>                       0

<NET-INCOME>                    2,340,736

<EPS-PRIMARY>                   7.09

<EPS-DILUTED>                   0

</TABLE>