alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Kerstin V. JOHANSSON v. Clayton T. NUNEZ, ABC Insurance Company, Sheriff of Cameron Parish, and XYZ Insurance Company.

Civ. A. No. 790191.

United States District Court, W. D. Louisiana, Lake Charles Division.

July 27, 1979.

*1271G. Michael Bourgeois, Camp, Carmouche, Palmer, Barsh & Hunter, Lake Charles, La., for plaintiff.

Robert W. Clements, Stockwell, Sievert, Viccellio, Clements & Shaddock, Lake Charles, La., for defendant.

VERON, District Judge:

RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Kerstin V. Johansson, a citizen of Sweden, brought this direct action in tort against Reliance Insurance Company, for damages arising out of an automobile accident in Cameron, Louisiana. Reliance Insurance Company is the insurer of Eva Marian Johansson, plaintiff’s sister, who is also a citizen of Sweden.

Title 28 U.S.C.A. Section 1332(c) provides in pertinent part:

> . Provided further, That in any direct action against the insurer of a policy or contract of liability insurance, whether incorporated or unincorporated, to which action the insured is not joined as a party-defendant,-such insurer shall be deemed a citizen of the State of which the insured is a citizen as well as of any State by which the insurer has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business.

Where the plaintiff and defendant are both aliens, diversity jurisdiction is not present. *See Joseph Muller Corporation v. Societe Anonyme de Gerance,*451 F.2d 727*cert. denied*406 U.S. 906, 92 S.Ct. 1609, 31 L.Ed.2d 816.

The plaintiff contends that § 1332(c) does not apply to a foreign state.

> It is to be noted that whenever a state of the United States is referred to in the statute, the capital “S” is used. In any place where a foreign state is referred to, a lower case “s” is used for “state” and a lower case “f” is used for “foreign.” In that portion of the statute referring to direct action statutes, the “S” in “State”, within the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1332(c) are all capital “S’s”. Thus, congress, legislating 28 U.S.C. 1332(c), sought to compel insurance companies to assume the insured’s American state domicile for diversity-of-citizenship purposes.

(Plaintiff’s brief at 3).

We find this argument unpersuasive. In the case of *Newsom v. Zurich Insurance Company,*397 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1968), the court held that “Congress placed no artificial restraint concerning foreign or alien states with a big “S” or a little “s” in its directions relating to insurers.”

For these reasons we GRANT the motion to dismiss filed by Reliance Insurance Company.
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Node 
-                   2020 Chief FOIA Officer's Report              

#   2020 Chief FOIA Officer's Report

2020 FMSHRC Chief FOIA Officer Report.pdf

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: (202)434-9900TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov
Order entered March 29, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 12 - 00839 - CR No. 05 - 12 - 00840 - CR JUAN FRANCISCO TURCIOS , Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F11 - 70886 - P , F11 - 70896 - P 

### O RDER T he Court GRANTS appellant’s March 26, 2013 motion to expedite submission of the appeals only to the extent that the appeals will be submitted on the next available docket.

/s/ CAROLYN W RIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
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 Interlink Electronics,  Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-Q for the  quarterly  period ended March 31, 2006 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"), I, Charles C. Best, Chief Financial Officer 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, to the best of my 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 the
Company.


 /S/  CHARLES C. BEST
-----------------------
Charles C. Best
Chief Financial Officer
November 16, 2006
EXHIBIT 11.1

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                       ANDRX CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE
              FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997, 1996 AND 1995
                      (in 000's, except for share amounts)

                                                     1997                       1996                    1995
                                                 ------------              ------------             --------

<S>                                             <C>                        <C>                      <C>
Net loss                                        $     (7,636)              $     (4,028)            $     (5,187)
                                                ============               ============             ============

Actual weighted average shares
of common stock outstanding                       14,213,100                 12,148,000                9,297,900

Impact of shares issued within
12 months of initial public offering,
after application of the treasury method                   -                          -                   92,000

Impact of warrants granted within
12 months of initial public offering,
after application of the treasury method                   -                          -                   40,400

Impact of options granted within
12 months of initial public offering,
after application of the treasury method                   -                          -                   16,500
                                              --------------             --------------           --------------

Basic and diluted weighted average shares
of common stock outstanding                       14,213,100                 12,148,000                9,446,800
                                                  ==========                 ==========              ===========

Basic and diluted net loss per share           $       (0.54)             $       (0.33)           $       (0.55)
                                               =============              =============            =============
</TABLE>
#### Jose Efrain ORELLANA-MORALES and Elsa Marina Sanabria-Magana, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,* Respondent.

No. 08-71146.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.**

Filed Dec. 22, 2010.

*99Sharon A. Healey, Law Office of Sharon A. Healey, Seattle, WA, for Petitioners.

Patrick James Glen, Esquire, OIL, Ana T. Zablah-Monroe, Esquire, Trial, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

 Eric H. Holder, Jr., is substituted for his predecessor, Michael B. Mukasey, as Attorney General of the United States. Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

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

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioners Jose Efrain Orellana-Morales and Elsa Marina Sanabria-Magana, husband and wife and natives and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the Board’s denial of asylum and withholding of removal because petitioners failed to show that Orellana-Morales’s alleged persecutors were guerillas who targeted him on account of his prior military service. Mr. Orellana-Morales could not explain why the unidentified men beat him in his home, other than to suggest they were either former guerillas or an individual to whom he had sold a car. *Ochave v. INS,*254 F.3d 859, 865 (9th Cir.2001) (“Asylum generally is not available to victims of civil strife, unless they are singled out on account of a protected ground”); *Molina-Morales v. INS,*237 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir.2001) (explaining that persecution because of a personal vendetta is not persecution on account of imputed political opinion).

*100Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s denial of CAT relief based on the Board’s finding that petitioners did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran government. *See Arteaga v. Mukasey,*511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir.2007).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Burke Priest, Chief Financial Officer of Smartdata Corp (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:  (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2008 (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 or 78 o(d)); and  (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date:  February 23, 2009  /s/ Burke Priest Burke Priest Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been furnished to Smartdata Corp. and will be retained by Smartdata Corp and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary

                    The following applications for certificates of public convenience and necessity and foreign air carrier permits were filed under subpart B (formerly subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's procedural regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201*et seq.*). The due date for answers, conforming applications, or motions to modify scope are set forth below for each application. Following the answer period, DOT may process the application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate cases a final order without further proceedings.                

*Docket Number:*                     OST-2001-11156.                

*Date Filed:*                     December 11, 2001.                

*Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope:*                     January 2, 2002.                

*Description:*                     Application of Westjet, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. section 41303, requesting a transfer of the foreign air carrier permit of WestJet Airlines Ltd. to engage in chartered and scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between US and Canadian points, operating as “WestJet.”                 

*Docket Number:*                     OST-2001-11164.                

*Date Filed:*                     December 12, 2001.                

*Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope:*                     January 2, 2002.                

*Description:*                     Application of Caribbean Star Airlines, Inc., pursuant to 49 U.S.C. section 41102 and subpart B, requesting the issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to engage in scheduled and charter foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between points in Florida and Puerto Rico, on the one hand, and points throughout the Caribbean region, Mexico and Central and South America, on the other hand.                

Andrea M. Jenkins,

Federal Register Liaison.

[FR Doc. 01-32236 Filed 12-31-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER****PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES–OXLEY ACT OF 2002**    I, Antonio C. Alvarez II, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Interstate Bakeries Corporation.     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements 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 thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:     a) designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designedunder our supervision, toensure that materialinformation relating to theregistrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by otherswithin those entities,particularly during the periodin which this report is beingprepared;     b) designed such internalcontrol over financialreporting, or caused suchinternal control over financialreporting to be designed underour supervision, to providereasonable assurance regardingthe reliability of financialreporting and the preparationof financial statements forexternal purposes in accordancewith generally acceptedaccounting principles;     c) evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures andpresented in this report ourconclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as ofthe end of the period coveredby this report based on suchevaluation; and     d) disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’sinternal control over financialreporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of anannual report) that hasmaterially affected, or isreasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’sinternal control over financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):     a) all significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internalcontrol over financialreporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and     b) any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involvesmanagement or other employeeswho have a significant role inthe registrant’s internalcontrol over financialreporting.Dated:  October 6, 2006         By:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>        5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF BOSTON CELTICS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND ITS
SUBSIDIARIES AS OF JUNE 30, 1997 AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>      1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           6,499
<SECURITIES>                                    42,573
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,677
<ALLOWANCES>                                        10
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               103,801
<PP&E>                                           1,625
<DEPRECIATION>                                     716
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 119,200
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,139
<BONDS>                                         47,500
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (7,790)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   119,200
<SALES>                                         62,998
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                62,998
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   62,275
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,873
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,820
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                420
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       420
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
        


</TABLE>
March 12, 2020






































40

Distribution:

Mark Heath, Esq.

Spilman Thomas & Battle PLLC

300 Kanawha Boulevard, East

P.O. Box 273

Charleston, WV 25321-0273

Emelda Medrano

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

230 S. Dearborn Street, 8th Floor

Chicago, IL 60604

Ali Beydoun, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

US Department of Labor

201 12th St. South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202-5450

April Nelson, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

US Department of Labor

201 12th St. South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202-5450

Melanie Garris

Office of Civil Penalty Compliance, MSHA

U.S. Department of Labor

201 12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202-5450

Aministrative Law Judge William B. Moran Federal

Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office 

of Administrative Law Judges

1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W., Suite 520N

Washington, DC 20004-1710