alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNILOC USA, INC. and Uniloc Singapore Private Limited, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant-Cross Appellant.

Nos. 2010-1035, 2010-1055.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 16, 2011.

Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, O’MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.

ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

A combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc was filed by Plaintiffs-Appellants, and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by Defendant-Cross Appellant. The court granted leave to file a brief amici curiae to ten damages experts, all appearing pro se.

The petition for panel rehearing was considered by the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc, response, and brief amici curiae were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll of whether to rehear the appeal en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.

Upon consideration thereof,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The petition of Plaintiffs-Appellants for panel rehearing is denied.

(2) The petition of Plaintiffs-Appellants for rehearing en banc is denied.

(3) The mandate of the court will issue on May 23, 2011.

O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

AMIR FATIR, aka 

STERLING HOBBS, 

Defendant Below, 

Appellant, 

v. 

STATE OF DELAWARE, 

Appellee.

§ 

§ No. 41, 2023 

§ 

§ Court Below–Superior Court 

§ of the State of Delaware 

§ 

§ Cr. ID No. 75060892DI (N) 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Submitted: April 6, 2023 

Decided: May 23, 2023 

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and TRAYNOR, Justices. 

ORDER

After consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the State’s motion to 

affirm, and the record on appeal, we conclude that the judgment below should be 

affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons cited by the Superior Court in its January 

20, 2023 order denying the appellant’s motion for correction or reduction of 

sentence. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is 

GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 

BY THE COURT: 

/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. 

 Chief Justice
Exhibit-23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-
45338 on Form S-8 of our report on the consolidated financial statements dated
August 21, 2006 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes
explanatory paragraphs discussing the uncertainty surrounding the TSI
litigation and the restatement of the Company's 2004 consolidated statements of
operations and cash flows) and our report on the consolidated financial
statement schedule (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes
an explanatory paragraph discussing the restatement of the 2004 consolidated
financial statement schedule) of AMCON Distributing Company and subsidiaries,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of AMCON Distributing Company and
subsidiaries for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Omaha, Nebraska
August 21, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOUND ON PAGES
12 AND 13 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           8,338
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,487
<ALLOWANCES>                                       601
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,169
<PP&E>                                           4,641
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,265
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  57,071
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,736
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      36,520
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    57,071
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                92,324
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   58,705
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 287
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 33,946
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,848
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             19,098
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,098
<EPS-BASIC>                                       4.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.85


</TABLE>
Exhibit
23




CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM







The Board
of Directors


Cascade
Financial Corporation





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement (No.
33-94456) dated July 10, 1995 on Form S-8, in the registration statements
(No. 333-32272, No. 333-97929, and No. 333-141329) on Form S-8 and on Form S-3
(No. 333-156301) of Cascade Financial Corporation of our report dated March 12,
2009, relating to the consolidated balance sheet of Cascade Financial
Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008 and 2007 and the related
consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive
income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2008, and in our same report, with respect to Cascade
Financial Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December
31, 2008, which report is included in this annual report on Form 10-K of Cascade
Financial Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2008.





/s/
Moss Adams LLP


Everett,
Washington


March 12,
2009
EXHIBIT 32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification

The undersigned officer certifies that this report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Maui General
Store, Inc.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Maui General Store, Inc. and
will be retained by Maui General Store, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

March 28, 2005                   /s/ Richard H. Miller
                                 -------------------------------------------
                                 Richard H. Miller
                                 (Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                                  Financial Officer)
CLD-041 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 15-3463

___________

IN RE: NATURAL BORN CITIZEN PARTY NATIONAL COMMITTEE; 

 HAROLD W. VAN ALLEN,

Petitioners

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

(Related to Civ. No. 1-09-cv-00253)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

November 5, 2015

Before: FISHER, JORDAN and VANASKIE, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: November 19, 2015)

_________

OPINION*

_________

PER CURIAM

Harold Van Allen1 petitions for a writ of mandamus. For the reasons below, we 

will deny the petition.

 

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not 

constitute binding precedent.

1 As a layperson, Van Allen may not represent other parties. See Osei-Afriyie v. Med. 

Coll. of Pa., 937 F.2d 876, 882-83 (3d Cir. 1991) (non-lawyer parent cannot represent 

interests of his children). Thus, we will consider the petition as filed only by Van Allen.
2

While the petition is difficult to understand, it appears that Petitioner seeks a court 

order creating a multi-district litigation in the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. He

also seeks to add several federal agencies as parties to the consolidated litigation.

The writ of mandamus will issue only in extraordinary circumstances. See Sporck 

v. Peil, 759 F.2d 312, 314 (3d Cir. 1985). As a precondition to the issuance of the writ, 

the petitioner must establish that there is no alternative remedy or other adequate means 

to obtain the desired relief, and the petitioner must demonstrate a clear and indisputable 

right to the relief sought. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 403 (1976). 

The case and appeal in this Circuit that they seek to include in the proposed 

consolidated litigation are Kerchner v. Obama, D.N.J. Civ. No. 09-00253, and Kerchner 

v. Obama, C.A. No. 09-4209. However, these cases have already been decided, and no 

further litigation is needed.2 Thus, there is no reason to consolidate these cases with any

others cases. We note that Petitioner was not listed as a party to the prior District Court 

case or appeal. 

Because Petitioner has not shown a clear and indisputable right to the relief 

sought, we will deny the mandamus petition. We warn Petitioner that frivolous and 

vexatious litigation may lead to sanctions and filing restrictions.

 

2 The District Court determined that the Kerchner plaintiffs lacked standing and 

dismissed the complaint. Kerchner v. Obama, 669 F. Supp. 2d 477 (D.N.J. 2009).

We affirmed the District Court’s decision and concluded that the appeal was frivolous. 

Kerchner v. Obama, 612 F.3d 204 (3d Cir.), cert denied, 562 U.S. 1082 (2010).
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-40832

Conference Calendar

 

VERNON KING, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FELICIA M. TURNER, Nurse,

Michael Unit,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:97-CV-379

- - - - - - - - - -

February 10, 1998

Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Texas prisoner Vernon King, Jr., No. 590316, is BARRED from

proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP) under the Prison Litigation

Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA) because, on at least three prior

occasions while incarcerated, King has brought an action or

appeal in a United States court that was dismissed as frivolous. 

King v. Dowdy, No. 96-50256 (5th Cir. July 16, 1996); King v.

Little, No. 96-50183 (5th Cir. June 27, 1996) (dismissals of

appeals as frivolous); King v. Little, No. W-94-CA-328 (W.D. Tex.

Feb. 26, 1996) (dismissal of complaint as frivolous and for 
No. 97-40832

-2-

failure to state a claim); see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Adepegba v.

Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, King’s

IFP status is DECERTIFIED, and he may not proceed IFP in any

civil action or appeal filed while he is in prison unless he is

under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(g). The appeal is DISMISSED.

 King has 15 days from the date of this opinion to pay the

full appellate filing fee of $105 to the clerk of the district

court, should he wish to reinstate his appeal. 

 IFP DECERTIFIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department



## 35 **CA 11-01729** PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., FAHEY, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

TIMOTHY C. CLARK, CLAIMANT-RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

GIBSON, MCASKILL & CROSBY, LLP, BUFFALO (JENNIFER L. NOAH OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

BROWN CHIARI LLP, LANCASTER (MICHAEL R. DRUMM OF COUNSEL), FOR CLAIMANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (Michael E. Hudson, J.), entered December 3, 2010 in a medical malpractice action. The order granted the application of claimant for leave to serve a late notice of claim.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Contrary to defendant’s contention, the Court of Claims did not abuse its discretion in granting claimant’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5). “The court is vested with broad discretion to grant or deny [such an] application” ( Wetzel Servs. Corp. v Town of Amherst , 207 AD2d 965). Although claimant failed to offer a reasonable excuse for his failure to serve the notice of claim within the 90-day statutory period ( see § 50-e [1] [a]), that failure “ ‘is not fatal where . . . actual notice was had and there is no compelling showing of prejudice to [defendant]’ ” ( Hale v Webster Cent

. School Dist ., 12 AD3d 1052, 1053; see Matter of LaMay v County of Oswego , 49 AD3d 1351, 1352, lv denied 10 NY3d 715). Here, defendant had actual notice of the facts constituting the claim by virtue of its possession of medical records pertaining to claimant’s care and treatment while he was a patient of defendant ( see Kavanaugh v Memorial Hosp. & Nursing Home , 126 AD2d 930, 931). The treatment provided by defendant forms the basis of the alleged malpractice, and the relevant facts are contained in defendant’s own records ( see Rechenberger v Nassau County Med. Ctr. , 112 AD2d 150, 152). Finally, we conclude that defendant**-2- 35 CA 11-01729** 
was not prejudiced as a result of the delay in the filing of a notice of claim.

Entered: February 17, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Williams, Appellant.

[666 NYS2d 404]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jay Gold, J.), rendered July 11, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s *Sandoval*ruling was a proper exercise of discretion. Defendant was not entitled to be insulated from questioning as to his prior theft-related crimes simply because of his *4tendency to specialize in a specific type of crime *(see, People v Post,*235 AD2d 299, *lv denied*90 NY2d 862). The number of convictions as to which inquiry was permitted, representing only a third of defendant’s criminal record, was not excessive *(see, People v Rivera,*227 AD2d 205, *lv denied*88 NY2d 993). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Tom, Mazzarelli and Colabella, JJ.
EX-10.38



 





Exhibit 10.38









Stock Award Agreement

Acknowledgement of Receipt


 

This Stock Award Agreement Acknowledgement of Receipt is entered into by and between Tween
Brands, Inc. (the “Company”), and the associate of the Company whose name appears below (the
“Associate”) in order to set forth the terms and conditions of Stock Awards granted to the
Associate under the 2005 Stock Option and Performance Incentive Plan (the “Plan”).



Associate Name:

Department:




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	Award Type	 	Date of	 	Expiration	 	Number of	 	Option	 	Vesting	 	Number of
	 	 	Grant	 	Date	 	Shares Granted	 	Price	 	Date	 	Shares to Vest
	 
	Incentive Stock Options
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Restricted Stock Award
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	Restricted Stock Award1
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 




Subject to the provisions of the Plan and the attached Stock Award Agreement Master Terms and
Conditions, which are incorporated herein by reference, the Company hereby grants to the Associate
the Stock Awards outlined above.



1Please see Appendix A for a description of the performance criteria applicable to this
Restricted Stock Award.
Please note that vesting will occur upon certification by the Compensation Committee of the Board
of Directors that performance criteria have been satisfied.



The Company and the Associate have executed this Agreement as of the Date of Grant set forth above.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	      Tween Brands, Inc.	 	 	 	Associate:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 

Michael W. Rayden
	 	 
	 	 

	 	 







74
Exhibit 23
 
 
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 The Board of Directors and Stockholders
 Covenant Transportation Group, Inc.:
 
 We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-134939, 033-88686, 333-2654, 333-67559, 333-37356, 333-50174, 333-88486, and 333-105880) of Covenant Transportation Group, Inc. of our report dated March 1, 2011, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Covenant Transportation Group, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2010.
 
 
 /s/KPMG, LLP
 
 Atlanta, Georgia
 
 March 1, 2011
   Back to Form 10-K
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 Amended Quarterly Report of Viva International, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), theundersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of theundersigned’s knowledge, that: 

 

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

 
| Dated: August 21, 2006 | By: | */s/ Rodolfo J. Dominguez* |
|------------------------|-----|----------------------------|

Rodolfo J. Dominguez, Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)

 
| Dated: August 21, 2006  | By: | */s/ Robert J. Scott* |
|------------------------------|-----|-----------------------|

Robert J. Scott, Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 48306]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22396]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #15340 and #15341; South Carolina Disaster Number 
SC-00050]


Administrative Declaration of a Disaster for the State of South 
Carolina

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a 
disaster for the State of South Carolina dated 10/05/2017.
    Incident: Hurricane Irma.
    Incident Period: 09/06/2017 through 09/13/2017.

DATES: Issued on 10/05/2017.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/04/2017.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/05/2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster 
loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally 
announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: Beaufort, Jasper.
Contiguous Counties:
    South Carolina: Colleton, Hampton.
    Georgia: Chatham, Effingham.
    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Homeowners with Credit Available Elsewhere.................      3.500
  Homeowners without Credit Available Elsewhere..............      1.750
  Businesses with Credit Available Elsewhere.................      6.610
  Businesses without Credit Available Elsewhere..............      3.305
  Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere...      2.500
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.500
For Economic Injury:
  Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit      3.305
   Available Elsewhere.......................................
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.500
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 15340 8 
and for economic injury is 15341 0.
    The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are South Carolina, 
Georgia.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Linda E. McMahon,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-22396 Filed 10-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### HABIB J. GASTON *v.*COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

(AC 32214)

DiPentima, C. J., and Beach and Foti, Js.

Argued October 21

officially released November 8, 2011

Per Curiam.

The appeal is dismissed.
Exhibit
32.2








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





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and in connection with the filing by Intermost
Corporation, a Wyoming Corporation (the “Company”) with the Securities and
Exchange Commission of its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months
ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”), the undersigned, Thomas Lee, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, that to the best of his
knowledge:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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.





This certification is being provided
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be deemed a part of this Report, nor is
it to be deemed to be “filed” for any purpose whatsoever.





Date:  February
12, 2009








By:
            /s/ Thomas LeeThomas
      Lee,
              Chief
      Financial Officer





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.