alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that thi s

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED September 15, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-60787 Summary Calendar
MORTAZA NASSIRAN, Petitioner,

versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A74 085 447 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and KING and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *

Mortaza Nassiran, a native and citizen of Iran, appeals the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b. Because cancellation of removal is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1229b, the jurisdictional bar of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(I) applies in the instant case. This court lacks jurisdiction to review the Attorney General’s discretionary decision regarding cancellation of removal. S ee Wilmore v.2

Gonzales , 2006 WL 1828644, __ F.3d ___ (5th Cir. July 5, 2006); Rueda v. Ashcroft , 380 F.3d 831, 831 (5th Cir. 2004); 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b); 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(I). The petition for review is DISMISSED .
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3319 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 21, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 440 South Gulling Street in Portola, California, as the ‘‘Army Specialist Jeremiah Paul McCleery 

Post Office Building’’. 

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


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3319 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. ARMY SPECIALIST JEREMIAH PAUL MCCLEERY 

2 POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 440 South Gulling Street in 

5 Portola, California, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Army Specialist Jeremiah Paul McCleery Post Office 

7 Building’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

11 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Army Specialist Jere12 miah Paul McCleery Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives October 20, 

2009. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Section 1350 Certifications
                                   Exhibit 32

         In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of IPIX  Corporation  and its
  wholly-owned subsidiaries  (collectively,  the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
  period  ending  June  30,  2004 as  filed  with the  Securities  and  Exchange
  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  we, Donald  Strickland and Paul
  Farmer, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively,
  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:


         (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/ Donald Strickland
  Donald Strickland
  Chief Executive Officer
  July 23, 2004



  /s/ Paul Farmer
  Paul Farmer
  Chief Financial Officer
  July 23, 2004





  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 15.1**

** **

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

**To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of GW Pharmaceuticals plc**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in RegistrationStatement No. 333-195747 on Form F-3 of our reports dated 2 December 2014, relating to the consolidated financial statements ofGW Pharmaceuticals plc, and the effectiveness of GW Pharmaceuticals plc’s internal control over financial reporting (whichreport expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of GW Pharmaceuticals plc’s internal control over financial reportingbecause of a material weakness), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of GW Pharmaceuticals plc for the year ended 30 September2014.

 

/s/ Deloitte LLP

Reading, United Kingdom

2 December 2014
<PAGE>
Exhibit 3.1.2

                                                                         1611505
                                                                         A651892
                                                                           FILED
                                                                     JUNE 6 1998


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                       OF

                           ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION

JOHN V. ROOS certifies that:

      1. He is the incorporator of Voxel, a California corporation.

      2. He hereby adopts the following amendment of the articles of
incorporation of this corporation:

            Article IV is amended to read as follows:

            "This corporation is authorized to issue only one class of shares of
            stock, designated "Common Stock," and the total number of shares
            which this corporation is authorized to issue is 10,000,000."

      3. No directors were named in the original articles of incorporation and
none have been elected.

      4. No shares have been issued.

I further declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
California that the matters set forth in this certificate are true and correct
of my own knowledge.


Date: June 3, 1988


                                             /s/ John V. Roos
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             John V. Roos, Incorporator
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/A for the period ended December 31, 2010 of Dutch Gold Resources, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Daniel W. Hollis, 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) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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





Date:November 2, 2011





/s/ Daniel W. HollisDaniel W. Hollis, Chief Executive Officer and Director(principal executive officer)
Order Entered October 21, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-16-01179-CV

IN RE LEE JEROME LEWIS, Relator

Original Proceeding from the Criminal District Court No. 6

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F14-5207-X

ORDER

Before Justices Francis, Fillmore, and Stoddart

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus for want of jurisdiction. 

/s/ CRAIG STODDART

 JUSTICE
EX-33 (n)
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Document Custody
1015 10th Avenue SE
Minneapolis, MN 55414


Appendix I


ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA

Corporate Trust Services division of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
(the "Company") is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing
criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the
Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company has determined that the
servicing criteria are applicable in regard to the servicing platform for the
period as follows:

Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting required under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backed
securities and commercial mortgage-backed securities issued on or after January
1, 2006, for which the Company provides document custody services, excluding any
publicly issued transactions issued by any government sponsored entity (the
"Platform").

Applicable Servicing Criteria: The servicing criteria set forth in Item
1122(d)(4)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(ii), in regard to the activities performed by the
Company with respect to the Platform (the "Applicable Servicing Criteria"). The
Company has determined that all other servicing criteria set forth in Item
1122(d) are not applicable to the Platform.

Period: Twelve months ended December 31, 2006 (the "Period").

With respect to the Platform, the Company provides the following
assessment of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:

1. The Company is responsible for assessing the Company's compliance with
the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period.

2. The Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria. In performing this assessment, the Company used the criteria set forth
by the Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of
Regulation AB.

3. Based on such assessment, as of and for the Period, the Company has
complied, in all material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation
report with respect to the Company's assessment of compliance as of and for the
Period.


WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

By: /s/ Shari L. Gillund
Shari L. Gillund

Its: Senior Vice President

Dated: March 1, 2007
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7808

SHAWN PATRICK DICKSON, Petitioner - Appellant, and LISA RICHARDSON, Petitioner, versus MOLLY Q. RUHL, Clerk; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. M. J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-96- 3291-MJG) Submitted: February 27, 1997 Decided: March 13, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shawn Patrick Dickson, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).23 PER CURIAM: Shawn Dickson, a Maryland inmate, appeals the order of the district court dismissing his petition for habeas corpus relief brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104- 132, 110 Stat. 1214. The district court dismissed Dickson's claims as to his Montgomery County convictions on the merits and dismissed without prejudice Dickson's claims regarding his Prince George's County convictions so that he may file a separate § 2254 petition. We affirm on the modified grounds that Dickson failed to exhaust his state remedies. A prisoner petitioning for federal habeas relief must firstpresent his claims to state courts and exhaust all available remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (b), (c). Dickson's petition reveals that he failed to exhaust his available state court remedies in Maryland. See Maryland Uniform Post-Conviction Procedure Act, Md. Ann. Codeart. 27, § 645A (1992). We therefore grant a certificate of appealability and modify the judgment to reflect dismissal without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies and affirm the judgment as modified. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
<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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30,
2003 of Edelbrock Corporation (the "Company") as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Aristedes T. Feles,
Vice- President of Finance and Chief Financial 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 (15 U.S.C. Section 78m(a)
or Section 78o(d)); and

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

September 26, 2003                                ARISTEDES T. FELES
                                                  ------------------
                                                  Aristedes T. Feles
                                                  Vice-President of Finance and
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

PHILIP JEFF GLEN,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 11-30236

D.C. No. 1:10-cr-00082-RFC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Richard F. Cebull, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 15, 2012 ** 

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

Philip Jeff Glen appeals from the 90-month sentence and lifetime term of

supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution

and receipt of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2). We

FILED

MAY 18 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-30236

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Glen contends that his below-Guidelines sentence is substantively

unreasonable in light of the alleged deficiencies in U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2 and the 18

U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. The record reflects that Glen’s sentence is

substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the section

 3553(a) sentencing factors. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

Glen also contends that the lifetime term of supervised release is

substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the

section 3553(a) sentencing factors, the lifetime term of supervised release is not

substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Apodaca, 641 F.3d 1077, 1082-

84 (9th Cir. 2011).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(D)/15D-14(D)
                     UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
      I, Anthony N. Renzi, certify that:
      1. I have  reviewed  this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D
         required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on
         Form 10-K of RAMP Series  2006-RS2  Trust (the  "Exchange  Act periodic
         reports");
      2. Based on my knowledge,  the Exchange Act periodic  reports,  taken as a
         whole,  do 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,  all of the  distribution,  servicing and other
         information  required  to be  provided  under  Form 10-D for the period
         covered  by this  report  is  included  in the  Exchange  Act  periodic
         reports;
      4. I  am  responsible  for  reviewing  the  activities  performed  by  the
         servicers  and  based  on  my  knowledge  and  the  compliance  reviews
         conducted in preparing the servicer  compliance  statements required in
         this report under Item 1123 of  Regulation  AB, and except as disclosed
         in the Exchange Act periodic  reports,  the  servicers  have  fulfilled
         their  obligations  under  the  servicing  agreements  in all  material
         respects; and
      5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing  criteria
         for asset-backed  securities and their related  attestation  reports on
         assessment  of  compliance  with  servicing  criteria for  asset-backed
         securities  required to be included in this report in  accordance  with
         Item 1122 of  Regulation  AB and  Exchange  Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18
         have been  included as an exhibit to this  report,  except as otherwise
         disclosed in this  report.  Any  material  instances  of  noncompliance
         described in such  reports  have been  disclosed in this report on Form
         10-K.

         In  giving  the  certifications  above,  I have  reasonably  relied  on
         information  provided  to me by  the  following  unaffiliated  parties:
         JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A.

      Date:  March 26, 2007

      By:   /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
            --------------------
            Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
            Title: Managing Director
[No. 42294-8-II.

Division Two.

October 2, 2012.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Jerell Marshon Jackson, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 09-1-02596-9, Elizabeth P. Martin, Vicki L. Hogan, and Thomas Felnagle, JJ., entered June 24, 2011. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per

Johanson, J.,

concurred in by Worswick, C.J., and Penoyar, J.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
                                                                    ------------



                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                                        


The Board of Directors
U.S. Foodservice:


   
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements on Form S-3 (333-67553) and Form S-8 (Nos. 33-88140, 33-88142, 33-
88144, 33-88146, 33-81011, 333-37359, 333-43185 and 333-47759) of U.S.
Foodservice of our report, dated August 14, 1998, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of U.S. Foodservice and Subsidiaries as of June 28,
1997 and June 27, 1998 and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders' equity, cash flows and schedules for each of the years then ended,
which report appears in the Form 10-K/A-2 for the year ended June 27, 1998.    


/s/ KPMG LLP

   
KPMG LLP
Baltimore, Maryland
March 1, 1999
Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement


 Exhibit 10.1 
 EAGLE FAMILY FOODS, INC. 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 This Amendment No. 1 to the Employment Agreement (the “Amendment”) is made as of March 29th, 2007, by and between Eagle Family
Foods, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Craig A. Steinke (“Executive”). 
 WHEREAS,
the Company and Executive are parties to an Employment Agreement dated as of November 23, 2004 (the “Employment Agreement”); and 
 WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to amend the Employment Agreement. 
 NOW, THEREFORE,
the parties agree as follows: 
 1. Section 8.4(b) shall be amended in its entirety to read as follows: 
 “(b) In lieu of all other salary an incentive compensation payments which Executive would have earned under this Agreement but for his termination,
the Company shall pay in a lump sum to Executive, as liquidated damages, an amount equal to $1,000,000, plus” 
 2. To the extent not
amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall continue with full force and effect in accordance with its terms. 






 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been entered into as of the date first set forth above. 
  

							
	EAGLE FAMILY FOODS, INC.	 		 	CRAIG A. STEINKE
			
	 /s/ Michael P. Conti
	 		 	 /s/ Craig Steinke

	By:	 	Michael P. Conti	 		 	Signature
	Title:	 	Vice-President Finance	 		 	
				
		 		 		 	 Craig Steinke

		 		 		 	Printed Name
Exhibit
99.4








CERTIFICATE
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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10K of Grosvenor
Explorations Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended June 30, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Rizanina
Raneses, Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:





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





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





September
13, 2008




RIZANINA
RANESES


Rizanina
Raneses


Chief
Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director











-1-
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-19-00340-CV

In re Dr. Deborah D. Nance, Trustee for the John Reynolds Family Trust

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Relator Dr. Deborah D. Nance, Trustee for the John Reynolds Family Trust, has 

filed a petition for writ of mandamus and an emergency motion to stay respondent’s order. See

Tex. R. App. P. 52.1, 52.10(a). We grant the motion and temporarily stay the trial court’s 

May 3, 2019 order granting Entity Defendants’ motion to strike privilege assertions, pending 

further order of this Court. See id. 52.10(b). The Court orders the real parties in interest to file a 

response to the petition for writ of mandamus on or before May 28, 2019.

It is ordered on May 17, 2019.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Kelly and Smith