alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 30, 2021

t0623 

# Order

Clerk June 30, 2021

162211 & (54)(55)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 162211

COA: 350391

Oakland CC: 2019

- 175232

- AR

ALTON FONTENOT, JR.,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion to enlarge the record is GRANTED. The

application for leave to appeal the September 10, 2020 judgment of the Court of Appeals

is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral argument on the application. MCR

7.305(H)(1).

The appellant shall file a supplemental brief addressing: (1) whether the

administrative logs documenting the rout ine inspection of the DataMaster machine used

to determine the appellant’s alcohol level, see Mich Admin Code R 325.2653(3), are

testimonial and thus in admissible under the Confrontation Clauses, US Const, Am VI;

Const 1963, art 1, § 20; see Crawford v Was hington , 541 US 36 (2004); Melendez

- Diaz v

Massachusetts , 557 US 305 (2009); Bullcoming v New Mexico , 564 US 647 (2011);

Williams v Illinois , 567 US 50 (2012); and People v Nunley , 491 Mich 686 (2012); and

(2) whether the logs are admissible pursuant to MR E 803(6), the business records

exception to the hearsay rule. The appellant’s brief shall be filed by October 25, 2021,

with no extensions except upon a showing of good cause. In the brief, citations to the

record must provide the appendix page numbers a s required by MCR 7.312(B)(1). The

appellee shall file a supplemental brief within 21 days of being served with the

appellant’s brief. A reply, if any, must be filed by the appellant within 14 days of being

served with the appellee’s brief. The motion t o remand remains pending.

The National College of DUI Defense, the Criminal Defense Attorneys of

Michigan, the Michigan Association of OWI Attorneys and the Michigan Medical

Marihuana Association are invited to file supplemental briefs amicus curiae. Ot her

persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may

move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Managers

DB Commodity Services
LLC:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-132484) of PowerShares
DB G10 Currency Harvest Fund and Subsidiary of our reports dated March 8, 2010, with respect to the consolidated statements of financial condition, including the consolidated schedules of investments, of PowerShares DB G10 Currency Harvest Fund and
Subsidiary as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated statements of income and expenses, changes in shareholders equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2009, and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, which reports appear in the December 31, 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K of PowerShares DB G10 Currency Harvest Fund and Subsidiary. We also consent to the
incorporation by reference of our reports dated June 18, 2010, with respect to the statements of financial condition, including the schedules of investments of DB G10 Currency Harvest Master Fund as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related
statements of income and expenses, changes in unitholders equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2009 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009,
which reports appear in the December 31, 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K of DB G10 Currency Harvest Master Fund.



|                                
|--------------------------------
|/s/ KPMG LLP                    
|New York, New York June 18,
2010
Exhibit 32.2

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

       In  connection with the Quarterly Report of BF Acquisition
Group  V,  Inc.  (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB  for  the  period
ending October 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William Colucci,
Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted  pursuant  to  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of
2002, that:

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

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

Dated: December 15, 2005


                           /s/ William Colucci
                           -------------------------------
                           William Colucci, Treasurer
                           BF Acquisition Group V, Inc.
Exhibit 13.1



Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1650,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Arun Nayyar, President and Chief Executive Officer of VANC PHARMACEUTICALS INC. (the Company), certify that to the best of my knowledge:



1.

the Transition Report on Form 20-F of the Company for six months (stub year) ended December 31, 2015as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.



/s/Arun Nayyar

Arun Nayyar

Chief Executive Officer

April 29, 2016
EXHIBIT 32.1

                      Statement of Chief Executive Officer
           Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350

      The undersigned, Phyllis A. Murphy, is the President and Chief Executive
Officer of Webster City Federal Bancorp (the "Company").

      This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the
Company of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended
September 30, 2003 (the "Report").

      By execution of this statement, I certify that:

            A)    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. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and

            B)    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods
                  covered by the Report.

      This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so
that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended that this
statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended.

----------------------------------            ----------------------------------
Dated                                         Phyllis A. Murphy
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
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Carl Savoy","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/csavoy\/","title":"FMC Holds First Meeting of the National Shipper Advisory Committee","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"kv1o4ufk52\"><a href=\"\/fmc-holds-first-meeting-of-the-national-shipper-advisory-committee\/\">FMC Holds First Meeting of the National Shipper Advisory Committee<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/fmc-holds-first-meeting-of-the-national-shipper-advisory-committee\/embed\/#?secret=kv1o4ufk52\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“FMC Holds First Meeting of the National Shipper Advisory Committee” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"kv1o4ufk52\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

# TIME AND DATE: 

10:00 a.m., Thursday, November 30, 2017.

# PLACE: 

The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street entrance).

# STATUS: 

Open.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

                        The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open session:                         *Secretary of Labor*                         v.                         *The American Coal Company,*                         Docket No. LAKE 2011-701 (Issues include whether on remand the Judge erred by not adequately explaining the basis for the assessed penalty amounts.)                    

Any person attending this meeting who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: 

Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

# PHONE NUMBER FOR LISTENING TO MEETING: 

1 (866) 867-4769, Passcode: 678-100.

Dated: November 6, 2017.

Sarah L. Stewart,

Deputy General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 2017-24406 Filed 11-6-17; 4:15 pm]

 BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-60673

Summary Calendar 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee 

v. 

CHRIS EUGENE COSNER, 

Defendant-Appellant 

Appeals from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Mississippi 

USDC No. 1:15-CR-96-1 

Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

A jury convicted Chris Eugene Cosner of bank robbery in violation of 

18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) and brandishing a firearm in relation to a crime of 

violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii). The district court sentenced 

Cosner as a career offender pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 to a total of 360 

months of imprisonment. Cosner now appeals, contending that his bank 

robbery conviction is not a “crime of violence” for the purposes of serving as a 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fif h Circuit

FILED

June 13, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-60673 Document: 00514031263 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/13/2017
No. 16-60673

2 

predicate offense for his § 924(c)(1) conviction or for application of the careeroffender guideline. He also asserts that the district court improperly 

participated in plea negotiations and that trial counsel rendered 

constitutionally ineffective assistance. We affirm. 

First, as Cosner concedes, his challenges to the characterization of his 

federal bank robbery conviction of a “crime of violence” are foreclosed by our 

recent decision in United States v. Brewer, which held that federal bank 

robbery is categorically a “crime of violence” as defined by § 4B1.2(a)(1) for the 

purpose of the career-offender guideline. See 848 F.3d 711, 714-16 (5th Cir. 

2017). Because § 4B1.2(a)(1) defines “crime of violence” “in exactly the same 

manner as § 924(c)(3)(A),” see United States v. Jones, 854 F.3d 737, 740 (5th 

Cir. 2017), Brewer necessarily dictates that federal bank robbery is also 

categorically a “crime of violence” for the purposes of his § 924(c)(1) conviction, 

see 848 F.3d at 714-16.

 Second, Cosner fails to establish either that the district court 

impermissibly participated in plea discussions or, if it did, that such 

participation had any effect on the fairness and impartiality of his trial and 

sentencing. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(c)(1), (h); United States v. Crowell, 60 F.3d 

199, 205 (5th Cir. 1995).

Third, we are unpersuaded that this is a “rare case” in which the record 

is sufficiently developed to allow this court to consider Cosner’s claims of 

ineffective assistance of trial counsel in the first instance on direct appeal. See

United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). Accordingly, we 

dismiss those claims without prejudice to collateral review. Id.

 AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 16-60673 Document: 00514031263 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/13/2017
|Exhibit 32                                                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                  
|Certificate 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 of U.S. Neurosurgical, Inc.) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Alan Gold, President and Howard Grunfeld, Chief Financial Officer of U.S. Neurosurgical, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                      
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                            
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of U.S. Neurosurgical.

|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                              
|/s/  Alan Gold                                                
|                                                       
|Alan Gold
      PresidentNovember 18, 2004                    
|                                                              
|                                                              
|/s/  Howard Grunfeld                                          
|                                                    
|Howard Grunfeld
      Chief Financial OfficerNovember 18, 2004

|13
|--
# Honoring the Victims of the Sutherland Springs, Texas, Shooting

We are deeply saddened by the shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas, which took the lives of more than 25 innocent victims while they were attending church. As we mourn the victims of this unprovoked act of violence, we pray for healing and comfort for all the family members and loved ones who are grieving.

As a mark of respect for the victims of this senseless act of violence perpetrated on November 5, 2017, by the authority vested in me as President of the United States by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby order that the flag of the United States shall be flown at half-staff at the White House and upon all public buildings and grounds, at all military posts and naval stations, and on all naval vessels of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia and throughout the United States and its Territories and possessions until sunset, November 9, 2017. I also direct that the flag shall be flown at half-staff for the same length of time at all United States embassies, legations, consular offices, and other facilities abroad, including all military facilities and naval vessels and stations.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifth day of November, in the year of our Lord two thousand seventeen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-second.

[FR Doc. 2017-24463

Billing code 3295-F8-P
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2974 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make employers of spouses 

of military personnel eligible for the work opportunity credit. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 4, 2021 

Mr. DELGADO (for himself, Mrs. RODGERS of Washington, Mr. BEYER, Mr. 

KELLY of Pennsylvania, Mr. PANETTA, and Mr. BACON) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make 

employers of spouses of military personnel eligible for 

the work opportunity credit. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Military Spouse Hiring 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY OF SPOUSES OF MILITARY PERSONNEL 

7 FOR THE WORK OPPORTUNITY CREDIT. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 51(d) of 

9 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2974 IH

1 ‘‘or’’ at the end of subparagraph (I), by striking the period 

2 at the end of subparagraph (J) and inserting ‘‘, or’’, and 

3 by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

4 ‘‘(K) a qualified military spouse.’’. 

5 (b) QUALIFIED MILITARY SPOUSE.—Subsection (d) 

6 of section 51 of such Code is amended by adding at the 

7 end the following new paragraph: 

8 ‘‘(16) QUALIFIED MILITARY SPOUSE.—The 

9 term ‘qualified military spouse’ means any individual 

10 who is certified by the designated local agency as 

11 being (as of the hiring date) a spouse of a member 

12 of the Armed Forces of the United States.’’. 

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

14 this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after 

15 the date of the enactment of this Act to individuals who 

16 begin work for the employer after such date. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS