alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KRISTIN M PERRY, SANDRA B STIER,

PAUL T KATAMI and JEFFREY J

ZARRILLO,

Plaintiffs,

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

v

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his

official capacity as governor of

California; EDMUND G BROWN JR, in

his official capacity as attorney

general of California; MARK B

HORTON, in his official capacity

as director of the California

Department of Public Health and

state registrar of vital

statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her

official capacity as deputy

director of health information &

strategic planning for the

California Department of Public

Health; PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his

official capacity as clerkrecorder of the County of

Alameda; and DEAN C LOGAN, in his

official capacity as registrarrecorder/county clerk for the

County of Los Angeles, 

Defendants,

DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, GAIL J

KNIGHT, MARTIN F GUTIERREZ,

HAKSHING WILLIAM TAM, MARK A

JANSSON and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM –

YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF

CALIOFORNIA RENEWAL, as official

proponents of Proposition 8,

Defendant-Intervenors. /

No C 09-2292 VRW

ORDER

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 634 Filed 04/17/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

The parties and nonparties appear to be in substantial

agreement with respect to the outstanding discovery issues. See

Doc #633-6 at 2; Doc #633-7 at 1-2; Doc #633-10 at 2. Accordingly,

the court finds it appropriate to allow the parties and nonparties

until April 22, 2010 to confer and negotiate in order to reach a

stipulation that will resolve remaining discovery issues. In the

event the parties and nonparties are unable to reach a resolution

of these issues, they are DIRECTED to inform the court in writing,

either jointly or separately, not later than 5 PM PDT on April 22,

2010.

Good cause having been shown, see Doc #632 at 7, the

order to show cause why the evidentiary record should not be

closed, Doc #631, is hereby DISCHARGED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 634 Filed 04/17/10 Page 2 of 2
Case 3:09-cv-02729-MMC Document 32 Filed 02/10/10 Page 1 of 3
Case 3:09-cv-02729-MMC Document 32 Filed 02/10/10 Page 2 of 3
February 10

Case 3:09-cv-02729-MMC Document 32 Filed 02/10/10 Page 3 of 3
*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

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 97-20372

Summary Calendar

EARNEST KING,

Petitioner-Appellant,

VERSUS

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

H-95-CV-1616

November 26, 1997

Before WISDOM, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges

PER CURIAM:*

A Texas jury found Earnest King guilty of possession of

cocaine. After exhausting his state remedies, King unsuccessfully

sought relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. King appeals. He contends

that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction.

Specifically, he argues that the evidence is insufficient to show

that he knowingly possessed cocaine. We have reviewed the record
 

2 See Peters v. Whitley, 942 F.2d 937, 941 (5th Cir. 1991).

2

and the briefs of the parties, and find sufficient evidence to

support the conviction. 

An officer of the Houston Police Department was dispatched to

an apartment complex in response to a citizen complaint regarding

drug trafficking in the area. Upon his arrival, he encountered

King, who at that time was staggering and incoherent. King’s eyes

were glazed and his speech was slurred. The officer arrested King

for public intoxication. During a post-arrest search of King’s

person, the officer found a crack pipe, still damp, in a pocket of

King’s trousers. The receptacle contained a residue that was

visible to the naked eye. The officer conducted a field test on

the residue found in the pipe, and it tested positive for cocaine.

Four tests subsequently performed by a police chemist showed the

positive presence of cocaine within the residue. In sum, the

amount of cocaine was too small to be measured, but it was apparent

to the naked eye and sufficient for scientific tests to confirm

that the residue was cocaine.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a

rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of

the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.2

AFFIRMED.
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation and Fred Kirby, as Guardian ad Litem of James Kirby.

Motion to dispense with printing granted insofar as to permit the appeal to he heard upon a typewritten or mimeographed record, without printing the same, and upon typewritten or mimeographed appellant’s points, upon condition that the appellant serves one copy of the typewritten or mimeographed record and one copy of the typewritten or mimeographed appellant’s points on the attorney for the petitioner-respondent and files 6 typewritten copies or 19 mimeographed copies of both the record on appeal and appellant’s points with this court. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
### §617g. Colorado River compact as controlling authority in construction and maintenance of dam, reservoir, canals, and other works

(a) The United States, its permittees, licensees, and contractees, and all users and appropriators of water stored, diverted, carried, and/or distributed by the reservoir, canals, and other works herein, authorized shall observe and be subject to and controlled by said Colorado River compact in the construction, management, and operation of said reservoir, canals, and other works and the storage, diversion, delivery, and use of water for the generation of power, irrigation, and other purposes, anything in this subchapter to the contrary notwithstanding, and all permits, licenses, and contracts shall so provide.

(b) Also the United States, in constructing, managing, and operating the dam, reservoir, canals, and other works herein authorized in including the appropriation, delivery, and use of water for the generation of power, irrigation, or other uses, and all users of water thus delivered and all users and appropriators of waters stored by said reservoir and/or carried by said canal, including all permittees and licensees of the United States or any of its agencies, shall observe and be subject to and controlled, anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, by the terms of such compact, if any, between the States of Arizona, California, and Nevada, or any two thereof, for the equitable division of the benefits, including power, arising from the use of water accruing to said States, subsidiary to and consistent with said Colorado River compact, which may have been negotiated and approved by said States and to which Congress shall have given its consent and approval on or before January 1, 1929; and the terms of any such compact concluded between said States and approved and consented to by Congress after said date: Provided, That in the latter case such compact shall be subject to all contracts, if any, made by the Secretary of the Interior under section 617d of this title prior to the date of such approval and consent by Congress.

(Dec. 21, 1928, ch. 42, §8, 45 Stat. 1062.)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronald Ackerman, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Albany County Court, rendered June 9, 1977, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the first degree. In an eight count indictment, defendant was charged with three different acts of rape in the first degree (Penal Law, § 130.35, subd 3), a class B felony, three counts of sodomy in the first degree (Penal Law, *§*130.50, subd 3), a class B felony, one count of sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law, § 130.65, subd 3), a class D felony and one count of attempted rape in the first degree (Penal Law, § 110.00), a class C felony, all involving an 11-year-old female child. As the result Of a negotiated plea of guilty to rape in the first degree, in full satisfaction of the *879eight count indictment, defendant was sentenced to an indeterminate term in prison with a maximum of 21 years and a minimum of 7 years. This appeal on the sole ground of excessiveness of sentence ensued. We resist the compulsiveness of affirmance engendered by the repulsiveness of the crime, and note that defendant, represented by counsel, negotiated both the plea and the sentence and, further, established in the sentencing dialogue with the court both his understanding of and assent to the sentence imposed. On this record, we shall not interfere with the exercised discretion of the trial court *(People v Finke,*51 AD2d 1089, 1090). Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ‘‘Report’’) by MDwerks Inc. (the ‘‘Registrant’’), I, Howard B. Katz, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify that:

|          |                                                                                                                                   |
|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1.  | 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 conditions and results of operations of Registrant. |

|  | /s/ Howard B. Katz                        Name: Howard B. KatzTitle: Chief Executive Officer |
|--|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Dated: April 5, 2007

----
STATE OF LOUISIANA 

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

KINYA BOYD 

VERSUS 

NO. 2023 CW 1279 

CITY OF BATON ROUGE, PARISH 

OF EAST BATON ROUGE 

MARCH 13, 2024 

In Re: 

BEFORE: 

Cox Communications of Louisiana, LLC and Go 

Insurance Company, applying for supervisory 

19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East 

Rouge, No. 656948. 

GUIDRY, C.J., CHUTZ AND LANIER, JJ. 

Auto 

writs, 

Baton 

WRIT DENIED. The criteria set forth in Herlitz 

Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., 

396 So.2d 878 (La. 1981) (per curiam), are not met. 

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT 

FOR THE COURT 

JMG 

WRC 

WIL
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2855 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2855

          To extend the suspension of duty on Oxalic Anilide.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 9, 2005

 Mrs. Myrick introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
          To extend the suspension of duty on Oxalic Anilide.

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

SECTION 1. OXALIC ANILIDE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.04.13 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Ethanediamide, N-(2-
ethoxyphenyl)-N'-(2-ethylphenyl)-) is amended by striking ``12/31/
2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

KELLY GUY HERRING,

 Appellant,

v.

LPP MORTGAGE, LTD.,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

 § 

No. 08-08-00195-CV

Appeal from the

109th District Court

of Andrews County, Texas

(TC#17,340)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pending before the Court is Appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal pursuant to

TEX.R.APP.P. 42.1(a)(1). Appellant has complied with the requirements of TEX.R.APP.P. 42.1(a)(1).

Having considered the motion, we conclude it should be granted, because no party will be denied

relief to which it would otherwise be entitled. Therefore, we grant Appellant’s motion to dismiss

and do so with prejudice. In accordance with the parties’ agreement, costs are taxed against the party

incurring same. See TEX.R.APP.P. 42.1(d).

GUADALUPE RIVERA, Justice

March 19, 2009

Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Rivera, JJ.
Exhibit 99.1

[Chase Letterhead]



March 15, 2005



Chase Funding, Inc.
343 Thornall Street
Edison, NJ  08837



RE: Annual Statements as to Compliance


Pursuant to that certain Loan Servicing Agreement ("Agreement") dated as of June
1, 2004, Chase Mortgage Loan Asset Back Certificates, Series 2004-2, I, Douglas
C. Stephens, hereby certify that (I) a review of the activities of the Servicer
during the preceding year and the performance under this Agreement has been made
under my supervision, and (II) to the best of my knowledge, based on such
review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement for
such year.

Sincerely,



/s/ Douglas C. Stephens
-------------------------------------
Douglas C. Stephens
Vice President Default Loan Servicing

HJB/em

cc:  Lorraine Rohrig

Enc.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER CONTINUING DATE OF ORDER OF EXAMINATION(PROPOSED) 1

ERSKINE & TULLEY

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

MICHAEL J. CARROLL (St. Bar #50246)

220 Montgomery Street, Suite 303

San Francisco, CA 94104

Telephone: (415) 392-5431

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE AUTOMOTIVE) NO. C 09 1331 MHP (JL)

INDUSTRIES, et al., )

)

)

Plaintiffs, ) ORDER CONTINUING DATE OF

) ORDER OF EXAMINATION

vs. ) (PROPOSED)

) 

NILS JORGENSON, individually and )

doing business as JT BRAKE & CLUTCH)

)

Defendant. )

)

___________________________________)

Plaintiff and Judgment Debtor having agreed to continue the

Order of Examination in this matter, and good cause appearing.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Examination previously set for

June 30, 2010 is continued to August 30, 2010.

Dated:____________

 _____________________________

 Magistrate Judge James Larson 

 

Case 3:09-cv-01331-MHP Document 35 Filed 07/29/10 Page 1 of 1 Case3:09-cv-01331-MHP Document34 Filed07/28/10 Page1 of 1
CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of IASIS Healthcare LLC;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
    /s/ W. Carl WhitmerW. Carl WhitmerChief Financial Officer
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS89285 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
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

# AGENCY:

Antitrust Division, Department of Justice.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice publishes updated and supplemental guidance on the use of arbitration by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. The document includes case selection criteria to help identify Antitrust Division cases that would benefit from the application of arbitration. In addition, it includes guidance regarding practices that may be employed in an arbitration. The Antitrust Division is authorized to use alternative dispute resolution techniques, including arbitration, by the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990. This document updates and supplements previous Antitrust Division guidance regarding the appropriate use of ADR techniques.

# ADDRESSES:

                        The document is available on the Department's website at:                         *https://www.justice.gov/​atr/​page/​file/​1336516/​download.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        David B. Lawrence, Chief, Competition Policy & Advocacy Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, at (202) 305-9850,                         *David.Lawrence@usdoj.gov.*

Suzanne Morris,

Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics. 

[FR Doc. 2020-26953 Filed 12-7-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
§ 203.28 Economic soundness of projects. The mortgage must be executed with respect to a project which, in the opinion of the Commissioner, is economically sound, except that this section shall not apply in each of the following instances: ( a ) To a mortgage of the character described in § 203.18(d) and with respect to such a mortgage, the Commissioner shall determine that the mortgage is an acceptable risk giving consideration to the need for providing adequate housing for families of low and moderate income, particularly in suburban and outlying areas or small communities.
( b ) To a mortgage of the character described in § 203.18 (e).
( c ) To a mortgage of the character described in § 203.43a.
( d ) To a mortgage in a federally impacted area described in § 203.43e.
( e ) To a rehabilitation loan of the character described in § 203.50.
[36 FR 24508, Dec. 22, 1971, as amended at 42 FR 57434, Nov. 2, 1977; 45 FR 33966, May 21, 1980; 53 FR 8880, Mar. 18, 1988]
§ 881.104 Applicability of part 881. ( a ) Part 881, in effect as of February 20, 1980, applies to all proposals for which a notification of selection was not issued before the February 20, 1980 effective date of part 881. (See 24 CFR part 881, revised as of April 1, 1980). Where a notification of selection was issued for a proposal before the February 20, 1980, effective date, part 881 in effect as of February 20, 1980 applies if the owner notified HUD within 60 calendar days that the owner wished the provisions of part 881, effective February 20, 1980, to apply and promptly brought the proposal into conformance.
( b ) Subparts E (Housing Assistance Payments Contract) and F (Management) of this part apply to all projects for which an Agreement was not executed before the February 20, 1980, effective date of part 881. Where an Agreement was so executed: ( 1 ) The owner and HUD may agree to make the revised subpart E of this part applicable and to execute appropriate amendments to the Agreement and/or Contract.
( 2 ) The owner and HUD may agree to make the revised subpart F of this part applicable (with or without the limitation on distributions) and to execute appropriate amendments to the Agreement and/or Contract.
( c ) Section 881.607 (Termination of tenancy and modification of leases) applies to all families.
( d ) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section, the provisions of 24 CFR part 5 apply to all projects, regardless of when an Agreement was executed.
[61 FR 13591, Mar. 27, 1996, as amended at 65 FR 16722, Mar. 29, 2000]