alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Sabrina D. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee, and Kia Motors of America, Defendant.

No. 09-2296.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 12, 2011.

Decided: Jan. 21, 2011.

*732Sabrina D. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. David Christopher Marshall, Curtis L. Ott, Turner, Padget, Graham *&*Laney, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*ON REHEARING*

PER CURIAM:

Sabrina D. Davis appeals a decision of the district court dismissing her action against Kia Motors America, Inc. (“KMA”) for lack of jurisdiction. We affirm.*

Davis’s action proceeded under diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (2006). The district court dismissed Davis’s action for lack of jurisdiction, concluding that, “to a legal certainty,” Davis could not recover damages in excess of the $75,000 jurisdictional amount applicable in diversity cases under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).

We review de novo an order dismissing a complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. *JTH Tax, Inc. v. Frashier,*624 F.3d 635, 637 (4th Cir.2010). “In most [diversity] cases, the ‘sum claimed by the plaintiff controls’ the amount in controversy determination.” *Id.*(quoting *St. Paul Mercury Indem. Co. v. Red Cab Co.,*303 U.S. 283, 288, 58 S.Ct. 586, 82 L.Ed. 845 (1938)). However, even if the plaintiff seeks damages sufficient to satisfy the statutory amount, a court can dismiss the action when, “from the proofs, the court is satisfied to a [legal] certainty that the plaintiff never was entitled to recover that amount.” *St. Paul Mercury,*303 U.S. at 289, 58 S.Ct. 586.

Here, the district court concluded that, “to a legal certainty,” Davis could not recover the jurisdictional amount, based on the warranty under which Davis sought relief. We agree with the district court’s conclusion. Accordingly, we affirm the de*733cisión of the district court. 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.*

*

 In a prior opinion we dismissed Davis’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that her notice of appeal was untimely. *Davis v. KIA Motors America, Inc.,*370 Fed.Appx. 408 (4th Cir.) (No. 09-2296), *cert.*denied, U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 196, 178 L.Ed.2d 118 (2010). However, because no separate entry of judgment was filed in the district court, judgment was not entered until January 15, 2010, and Davis’s notice of appeal was timely. Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(2), (7). Under these extraordinary circumstances, we have exercised our inherent authority to sua sponte grant rehearing and recall the mandate in this appeal. *See Calderon v. Thompson,*523 U.S. 538, 549-50, 118 S.Ct. 1489, 140 L.Ed.2d 728 (1998). We vacate our original opinion, and replace it with this opinion.
**Exhibit 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consentto the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-34313, 333-33860, 333-56612, 33-88270, 333-108867, 333-120516 and 333-132499on Form S-8 of our report dated March 16,2005, relating to the consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity and comprehensiveincome, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2004, of Ameristar Casinos, Inc., appearing in thisAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Ameristar Casinos, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006./s/Deloitte & Touche LLP
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 Quarterly Report of Interlink Global Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Anastasios N. Kyriakides, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and
Principal Accounting 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 to my knowledge:

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

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

/s/ Anastasios N.Kyriakides                  Date:  December 12, 2005
Anastasios N. Kyriakides
Chairman of the Board,
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
 
                              QUAKER CITY BANCORP
 
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                    FOR THE YEAR   FOR THE YEAR   FOR THE YEAR
                                   ENDED JUNE 30, ENDED JUNE 30, ENDED JUNE 30,
                                        1998           1997           1996
                                   -------------- -------------- --------------
 <C> <S>                           <C>            <C>            <C>
     Average Common Shares
 A   Outstanding................      5,469,646      5,509,836      5,778,963
                                     ----------     ----------     ----------
 B   Net earnings for Period....     $6,610,000     $2,820,000     $3,569,000
                                     ==========     ==========     ==========
     Basic Earnings Per Share [B
     / A].......................          $1.21          $0.51          $0.62
                                     ==========     ==========     ==========
     Common Share Equivalents:
     Average Stock Options
 C   Outstanding................        602,107        499,128        607,904
                                     ----------     ----------     ----------
 D   Option Exercise Price......          $7.86          $4.80          $4.80
                                     ----------     ----------     ----------
 E   Exercise Proceeds [C x D]..     $4,732,561     $2,395,814     $2,917,939
                                     ----------     ----------     ----------
     Average Market Price in
 F   Period.....................         $17.13         $11.06          $8.63
                                     ----------     ----------     ----------
     Shares Repurchased At
 G   Market Price [E / F].......        276,273        216,620        338,116
                                     ----------     ----------     ----------
     Increase in Common Shares
 H   [C - G]....................        325,834        282,508        269,788
                                     ----------     ----------     ----------
     Shares Outstanding and
 I   Equivalents [A + H]........      5,795,480      5,792,344      6,048,751
                                     ==========     ==========     ==========
 J   Net Earnings for Period....     $6,610,000     $2,820,000     $3,569,000
                                     ==========     ==========     ==========
     Diluted Earnings Per Share
     [J / I]....................          $1.14          $0.49          $0.59
                                     ==========     ==========     ==========
</TABLE>
#### IN RE MARCUS S.

*Roseann Canny,*in support of the petition.

*Stephen G. Vitelli,*assistant attorney general, in opposition.

Decided June 15, 2010

The petition by the respondent father for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 120 Conn. App. 745 (AC 30498), is denied.
Order entered December 16, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 13
- 00839
- CR TOREY BOYKIN, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 366
- 82130
- 2012



### O RDER
The Court DENIES appellant’s December 12, 2013 third motion to extend time to file
his brief.
We ORDER the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial c ourt shall make appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8( b ). I f the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State , 742 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court isORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include written findings and r ecommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order. This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are

rec eived, whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
U.S. flag
    An official website of the United States government
     Here’s how you know Here’s how you know **Official websites use .gov**  A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**  A **lock** ( A locked padlock ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
 Farm Service Agency
 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 About FSA
  Ask USDA
  Contact Us
  Forms
 Menu
  close
   Home
    Programs & Services
     ARC/PLC Program
         Civil Rights
         Certified Mediation Program
         Climate Adaptation Plan
         Conservation Programs
         Cooperative Agreements
         Dairy Margin Coverage Program
         Disaster Assistance Programs
         Economic & Policy Analysis
       Emergency Relief 
         Environmental & Cultural Resource Compliance
         Farm Bill Home
         Farm Labor Stabilization & Protection Pilot Grants
         Farm Loan Programs
         Financial Management Information
         Increasing Land Access
         Initiatives
       Laws and Regulations
         Margin Protection Program for Dairy
         Market Facilitation Program
         MIDAS
         Organic Certification Cost Share Program
         Outreach & Education
         Payment Eligibility
         Price Support
         Rice Production Program
    State Offices
    Online Services
     LDP
         eARC/PLC
         Farmers.gov (FSA Farm+)
         FSA Online Data Resources
         Loan Assistance Tool
    Newsroom
     Fact Sheets
         News Releases
         Emergency Designations
         Stakeholder Information
         eFOIA
       Meetings & Events
         Public Service Announcements
         County Committee Elections
         Fence PostSearch small Search
 South Dakota State Events
 Section TopicsSouth Dakota HomeCounty OfficesCounty PCP DataDaily LDP RatesProgramsNewslettersState EventsState News ReleasesResources
 State Executive Director Steve Dick  Read Steve Dick'
 State Office Address 200 Fourth St. SWRoom 308
Huron, SD57350(605) 352-1160
(855) 243-6003
 Upcoming Events January 31, 2024 - **A Day with USDA at the Black Hills Stock Show.**
     Detailed agenda can be found at the SD NRCS events webpage:  A Day with USDA at Black Hills Stock Show | Natural Resources Conservation Service****
 Home
   Programs & Services
   State Offices
   Online Services
   Newsroom
 Farmers.gov
          USA.gov
          USDA.gov
          Whitehouse.gov
       Accessibility Statement
          Common Questions
          Freedom of Information Act
       No FEAR Report
          Information Quality
          Non-Discrimination Statement
       Policies and Links
          Privacy Policy
          Sitemap
    Sign up for updates
      Subscribe
 Farm Service Agency
 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 facebook-loFacebook
 youtube-loYouTube
 twitter-loTwitter
 gov-delivery-loTwitter
 rss-loRSS
rom 943A

(Rev. August 1985) Agricultural Employer’s Record of OMB No. 1545-0035,
Department of the Treasury Federal Tax Liability Expires 9-30-87
Internal Revenue Service|

‘Name as shown on Form 943 Employer identification number

Attach this form (or a statement giving the same information) to Form 943 if your tax liability for any month during the year is $3,000 or
more. If you use this form, do not complete lines A through L on Form 943. Write the total tax liability for the year (line V) on line M of Form
943. See rule (4) under ‘‘Deposit Rules” on page 4 of Form 943 and in section 10 of Circular A for more information.

Each month is divided into eight deposit periods that end on the 3rd, 7th, 11th, 15th, 19th, 22nd, 25th, and last day of the month. If
your tax liability for any month is $3,000 or more, find the eighth-monthly periods below during which you had paydays during that month
and make entries on the lines next to those periods. For example, if you pay wages on the 1st and 15th of each month, complete lines A, D,
1, L, Q, and T for each quarter. If your taxes for any month are $500 or more but less than $3,000, you can show your tax liability on the
total line for the month (1, II, or Ill).

The total tax liability for the year (line V) must equal net taxes on Form 943 (line 9). Otherwise, you may be charged a penalty, based on
your average tax liability, for not making deposits of taxes. (The dates and amounts of your deposits are now obtained from your Federal tax
deposit forms.)

Tax Liability
Date wages paid: First Quarter Second Quarter Third Quarter Fourth Quarter
First month of quarter: January April July October

1st through 3rd day .

4th through 7th day .

8th through 11th day

12th through 15th day .

16th through 19thday . .

20th through 22nd day . oe
23rdthrough 25thday. . . . .
26th through last day

ToOTMmvoay

v

| First month total .

Second month of quarter:
1st through 3rd day . hone
4ththrough 7thday. . . . . .
8ththroughllthday .... .
12th through 15th day .
16ththrough 19thday. . . . .
20th through 22ndday. . . . .
23rd through 25thday. . .
26th through lastday . . .

February May August November

vwozerxen-

v

ll Second month total. .

Third month of quarter:

Astthrough3rdday. . . . .

Aththrough7thday. . . .

8ththrough lilthday . . . .

12th through 15thday. . . .

16ththrough 19thday. . . .

20th through 22nd day .

23rd through 25th day .

26th through last day

March June September December

xe<c4H270

ll Third monthtotal . . . . I

IV Total for quarter (add lines |, I, and III)

V Total for year (enter here and online MofForm943) 2... 1 we ee ee ee

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see Form 943 instructions. Form 943A (Rev.8-85)
Exhibit
      32.2









**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTIONS 1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Franklin Credit Management Corporation
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Paul D. Colasono, 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; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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









U /s/
      Paul D. Colasono U


Paul
      D.
      Colasono


Chief
      Financial Officer


May
      22,
      2006
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1969

THE COUNTY OF GRAYSON, VIRGINIA; RICHARD VAUGHN, in his 

Official Capacity as Sheriff of Grayson County; THE COUNTY 

OF CARROLL, VIRGINIA,

Plaintiffs – Appellants,

v.

JOHN T. SPANE; DALE W. SUTPHIN,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

RA-TECH SERVICES, INC.,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Chief

District Judge. (7:13-cv-00384-GEC)

Submitted: June 19, 2015 Decided: July 2, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cullen Dennis Seltzer, SANDS ANDERSON PC, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellants. Gregory D. Habeeb, Monica Taylor Monday,
2

Daniel R. Sullivan, GENTRY, LOCKE, RAKES & MOORE, Roanoke, 

Virginia, for Appellee John T. Spane.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal the district court’s order dismissing 

their fraud in the inducement claims against John T. Spane and 

Dale W. Sutphin. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Cnty. Of Grayson v. Spane, No. 

7:13-cv-00384-GEC (W.D. Va. May 29, 2014). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Jamie KIRKPATRICK, individually, and as the Natural Father and Legal Guardian of B.W., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF WASHOE; Amy Reynolds, WCDSS Social Worker; Ellen Wilcox, WCDSS Social Worker; Linda Kennedy, WCDSS Social Worker, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 12-15080.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Feb. 17, 2016.

William Roland Kendall, Jr., Esquire, Law Offices of William R. Kendall, Jeffrey Friedman, I, Esquire, Jeffrey Friedman Attorney at Law, Reno, NV, David John Beauvais, Oakland, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Brian M. Brown, Herbert Kaplan, Deputy District, Kevin A. Pick, Esquire, Thorn-dal Armstrong Delk Balkenbush & Eisinger A Professional Corporation Law Offices, Reno, NY, for Defendants-Appellees.

D.C. No. 3:09-cv-00600-ECR-VPC.

ORDER

THOMAS, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonre-cused active judges, it is ordered that this ease be reheard en banc pursuant to Fed*1259eral Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

      ( print page 12566)    
                    Notice is hereby given that, on January 8, 2001, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), United Technologies Research Center has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership status. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing (“3M”), Austin, TX has been dropped effective January 1, 2001, as a party to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and United Technologies Research Center intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On March 11, 1999, United Technologies Research Center filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on May 20, 1999 (64 FR 27604).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on July 18, 2000 pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on January 11, 2001 (66 FR 2248).                

Dated: February 9, 2001.

Constance K. Robinson,

Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 01-4702 Filed 2-26-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
# FY20_Q3

# Percent Positives - User Notes
SCHEDULE P Acquisitions, Dispositions, and Changes of Interests

(Form 8865) in a Foreign Partnership

OMB No. 1545-1668

Department of the Treasury

Internal Revenue Service Attach To Form 8865. See Instructions for Form 8865.

Name of person filing Form 8865 Filer’s identifying number

Acquisitions

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 8865. Cat. No. 25943Q Schedule P (Form 8865) 2005

Part I

Part II

(under section 6046A)

(e)

% of interest

before acquisition

(b)

Date of acquisition

(a)

Name, address, and identifying number of

person from whom your interest was acquired

Printed on recycled paper

Dispositions

Part III Change in Proportional Interest

Part IV

(c)

FMV of

interest acquired

(d)

Basis in

interest acquired

(f)

% of interest

after acquisition

(a)

Description of change

Name of foreign partnership

Supplemental Information Required To Be Reported (see instructions)

(e)

% of interest

before disposition

(b)

Date of disposition

(c)

FMV of

interest disposed

(d)

Basis in

interest disposed

(f)

% of interest

after disposition

(a)

Name, address, and identifying number of

person who acquired your interest

(e)

% of interest

before change

(b)

Date of change

(c)

FMV of

interest

(d)

Basis in

interest

(f)

% of interest

after change

2005