alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(75 South. 629)

(6 Div. 301.)

#### SMITH v. STATE.

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

May 8, 1917.)

Criminal Daw c&wkey;1094 — Appeal — Failure to File Bill of Exceptions — Dismissal.

Whero the time for filing hill of exceptions has passed, the Attorney General’s motion to dismiss will be granted.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Daw, Cent. Dig. §§ 2807, 3204.]

Appeal from Criminal Court, Jefferson County; Wm. E. Fort,, Judge.

Charles Smith was convicted of buying, receiving, or concealing stolen property, and he appeals.

Appeal dismissed.

W. D. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.

BRICKEN, J.

The defendant was tried and convicted for the offense of 'buying, receiving, or concealing stolen property. The judgment of conviction was had on the' 26th day of September, 191®, and the appeal from' said judgment was taken on the 30th day of September, 1916. The time for filing bill of exceptions has passed. It is here submitted on motion of the Attorney General to dismiss the appeal. It appears from these facts that *82the motion of the Attorney General is well taken, and the appeal is accordingly dismissed. ,

Appeal dismissed.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-41019

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

OSCAR ASAEL GONZALES-MATUTE,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:14-CR-614-1

Before JOLLY, GRAVES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Oscar Asael GonzalesMatute raises an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Morales-Mota, 

704 F.3d 410, 412 (5th Cir. 2013), which rejected the argument that the Texas 

offense of “burglary of a habitation” is broader than the generic, contemporary 

definition of “burglary of a dwelling” under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) 

because it defines the “owner” of a habitation as a person with a “greater right 

 

* 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

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 18, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-41019 Document: 00513158031 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/18/2015
No. 14-41019

2

to possession of the property than the actor.” The motion for summary 

disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 14-41019 Document: 00513158031 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2015
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Employment of Women in the Federal Government, 1923 to 1939

              																	United States. Women's Bureau					,	Nyswander, Rachel Fesler					 and 	Hooks, Janet M. (Janet Montgomery). 						*Employment of Women in the Federal Government, 1923 to 1939 : Women's Bureau Bulletin, No. 182*,												Washington: 								Govt. Print. Off., 										1941,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5455,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### §§ 4907.104-4907.109 [Reserved]
§ 2700.74 Procedure for participation as amicus curiae. ( a ) After the Commission has directed a case for review, any person may move to participate as amicus curiae. Such participation before the Commission shall not be a matter of right but of the sound discretion of the Commission. A motion for participation as amicus curiae shall set forth the interest of the movant; indicate which party's position, if any, the movant supports; the reason why an amicus brief is desirable and why the matters asserted are relevant to the disposition of the case; and show that the granting of the motion will not unduly delay the proceeding or prejudice any party. The movant may conditionally attach its brief to its motion for participation as amicus curiae.
( b ) The brief of an amicus curiae shall be filed within the initial briefing period (*see* § 2700.75(a)(1)) allotted to the party whose position the amicus curiae supports.
( c ) In the interest of avoiding duplication of argument, however, the Commission may permit the filing of an amicus curiae brief within 20 days after the close of the briefing period set forth in § 2700.75(a)(1), provided that the amicus curiae's motion for participation as an amicus curiae is filed within the initial briefing period (*see* § 2700.75(a)(1)) allotted to the party whose position the amicus curiae supports. If the Commission grants any such motion, the Commission's order shall specify the time within which a response or reply may be made to the amicus curiae brief.
( d ) Any person who does not support a party in the proceeding must file its motion for participation as amicus curiae and brief no later than 20 days after initial briefs are filed (*see* § 2700.75(a)(1)). A motion for participation as amicus curiae must comply with the requirements set forth in paragraph (a) of this section. A brief of amicus curiae must comply with § 2700.75(c).
[58 FR 12164, Mar. 3, 1993, as amended at 64 FR 48714, Sept. 8, 1999; 71 FR 44209, Aug. 4, 2006; 71 FR 52211, Sept. 1, 2006]
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 114 

Recognizing the contributions of agricultural producers in Pennsylvania and 

throughout the Nation on the occasion of National Agriculture Day. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 21, 2007 

Mr. CASEY (for himself and Mr. SPECTER) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

MARCH 28, 2007 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the contributions of agricultural producers in 

Pennsylvania and throughout the Nation on the occasion 

of National Agriculture Day. 

Whereas National Agriculture Day is an annual celebration 

during which government agencies, community members, 

and agricultural groups work with agricultural producers 

to honor the importance of the agriculture industry; 

Whereas agriculture is a pillar of the economy of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and many other States across 

the country; 

Whereas agriculture is the number one industry in Pennsylvania and has contributed more than $45,000,000,000 to 

the economy of the Commonwealth; 


CCOLEMAN on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
2 

SRES 114 ATS 

Whereas agricultural producers in Pennsylvania export a considerable amount of food and agricultural and forest 

products, earning more than $1,500,000,000 annually in 

profits; 

Whereas dairy cattle from Pennsylvania are used as breeding 

stock in a number of countries around the world; 

Whereas Pennsylvania is the home of over 58,000 farms, covering more than 7,700,000 acres of land; 

Whereas Pennsylvania is a leading producer of mushrooms, 

eggs, pumpkins, apples, grapes, freestone peaches, ice 

cream, milk cows, chickens, and other agricultural products and livestock; 

Whereas each agricultural producer in the United States 

feeds more than 144 people and Pennsylvania’s agricultural producers are responsible for feeding more than 

8,000,000 mouths worldwide; 

Whereas agricultural producers in Pennsylvania and throughout the Nation provide the people of the United States 

with food, clothes, and many other staples; and 

Whereas the contribution of agricultural producers in Pennsylvania and throughout the United States should be 

honored with highest praise and respect: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) recognizes— 

3 (A) that agriculture is the number one in4 dustry in Pennsylvania; 


CCOLEMAN on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
3 

SRES 114 ATS 

1 (B) the outstanding contribution of Penn2 sylvania’s agricultural producers to the economy 

3 of the Commonwealth and the Nation; and 

4 (C) that agriculture in Pennsylvania is di5 verse and provides important nutrition to the 

6 people of the United States; and 

7 (2) pays tribute to agriculture and agricultural 

8 producers in Pennsylvania and throughout the 

9 United States on the occasion of National Agri10 culture Day. 

Æ 


CCOLEMAN on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
§ 2700.36 Contents of complaint. A complaint for compensation shall include: ( a ) A short and plain statement of the facts giving rise to the claim, including the period for which compensation is claimed;
( b ) The total amount of the compensation claimed, if known; and
( c ) A legible copy of any pertinent order of withdrawal or, if a legible copy is not available, the text of the order.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   In connection with the Annual Report of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company, (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard R. Walters, President and Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Little Squaw Gold Mining Company.    /s/ Richard R. Walters DATE:  March 20, 2007 Richard R. Walters, President   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Little Squaw Gold Mining Company and will be retained by Little Squaw Gold Mining Company to be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### HORWITZ v FRANKLIN (2 cases)

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

Nos 10387 & 10388.

Decided Nov 4, 1929

N. H. Guild for Horwitz.

Therman & Goldman, Cleveland, for Franklin.

*264VICKERY, PJ.

It was said in this court that it had a defense but there was no answer tendered in the court below setting up a defense nor was there any offer to prove what the defense was in the court below, but the notion seems to be prevalent that all it had to do during the term was to show that it had a good defense. Now that is where lawyers are mistaken. If service of summons is properly made and the return is properly made and judgment is ■ properly entered in the absence of the defendant by default, if it be a case where default judgment can be taken, or by proof of damages in such a case as the instant case, before such judgment can be set aside or vacated either during or after term, they must show some statutory reason why they failed to answer and be present and put in a defense at the time they should have done so. This being done if they then show that they have a good defense and offer a proper defense and tender proof to the court saying that, on paper at least, there is a defense, they would be entitled to have a judgment vacated; and if the court should refuse under those. circumstances, error might be prosecuted because there would be an abuse of discretion. But before a court can be charged with having abused his discretion, the party claiming it must have brought himself within the statute and show that a right of his had been violated.

Now if he did not set up a statutory ground as to why the answer and defense were not put in at the proper time, he cannot complain because the court does not give him the redress that he wants.

I know it is argued and thought that a court has control over his docket during the term. Nobody is more ready to concede that than I and had the court granted the motion and set aside the judgment, the other side could not have prosecuted error;, but when the court refused and the party who is injured by the refusal wishes to prosecute error, he must show that a right of his has been violated; that is, he must show that he had a statutory reason why he was not present and why he did not put in his defense, and then he must show that he had a proper defense and he must tender that defense, at least by answer, and the best authorities hold by evidence to sustain the answer.

In the instant case there was no statutory reason shown and there w,as no defense proffered or shown, and just how the court under such circumstances could be guilty of abuse of discretion is a little difficult to understand. In this case the judment was rendered regularly and the court did not abuse its discretion, at least it is not shown that it did in this record, and there being no errors in the record, we can do no other than to affirm the judgment.

Both judgments will, therefore, be affirmed.

Sullivan and Levine, JJ., concur.
(77 South. 1002)

#### COFIELD v. STATE.

(7 Div. 510.)

(Court of Appeals of Alabama.

Jan. 22, 1918.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Randolph County; S. L. Brewer, Judge.

F. Loyd Tate, Atty. Gen., for the State.

SAMFORD, J.

Appeal dismissed on motion of Attorney General.
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.
 Office of Management and Budget
 Section 1014(e) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344) requires a monthly report listing all budget authority for the current fiscal year for which, as of the first day of the month, a special message had been transmitted to Congress. This report gives the status, as of May 1, 2000, of three rescission proposals and two deferrals contained in one special message for FY 2000. The message was transmitted to Congress on February 9, 2000. Rescissions (Attachments A and C) As of May 1, 2000, three rescission proposals totaling $128 million have been transmitted to the Congress. Attachment C shows the status of the FY 2000 rescission proposals. Deferrals (Attachments B and D) As of May 1, 2000, $594 million in budget authority was being deferred from obligation. Attachment D shows the status of each deferral reported during FY 2000. Information From Special Message The special message containing information on the rescission proposals and deferrals that are covered by this cumulative report are printed in the edition of the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     cited below: 65 FR 9017, Wednesday, February 23, 2000 Jacob J. Lew, Director.
 Attachments **Attachment A.— Status of FY 2000 Rescissions**
[In millions of dollars]
Budgetary
                             resourcesRescissions proposed by the President
128.0Rejected by the CongressCurrently before the Congress for less than 45 days
128.0
 **Attachment B.— Status of FY 2000 Deferrals**
[In millions of dollars]
Budgetary 
                             resourcesDeferrals proposed by the President
1,622.0Routine Executive releases through May 1, 2000 (OMB/Agency releases of $1,027.6 million)
−1,027.6Overturned by the CongressCurrently before the Congress
594.4


BILLING CODE 3110-01-P [FR Doc. 00-13123 Filed 5-24-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3110-01-C
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Discussions of Labor Laws and Their Administration: At the 1933 Convention of the Association of Governmental Officials in Industry of the United States and Canada. Chicago, Ill

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Discussions of Labor Laws and Their Administration: At the 1933 Convention of the Association of Governmental Officials in Industry of the United States and Canada. Chicago, Ill : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 609*,												Washington, D.C: 								U.S. G.P.O., 										July 1934,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4131,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
§ 4041.26 PBGC review of standard termination notice. ( a ) *Review period* — ( 1 ) *In general.* The PBGC will notify the plan administrator in writing of the date on which it received a complete standard termination notice at the address provided in the PBGC's standard termination forms and instructions package. If the PBGC does not issue a notice of noncompliance under § 4041.31 during its 60-day review period following such date, the plan administrator must proceed to close out the plan in accordance with § 4041.28.
( 2 ) *Extension of review period.* The PBGC and the plan administrator may, before the expiration of the PBGC review period in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, agree in writing to extend that period.
( b ) *If standard termination notice is incomplete* — ( 1 ) *For purposes of timely filing.* If the standard termination notice is incomplete, the PBGC may, based on the nature and extent of the omission, provide the plan administrator an opportunity to complete the notice. In such a case, the standard termination notice will be deemed to have been complete as of the date when originally filed for purposes of § 4041.25(a), provided the plan administrator provides the missing information by the later of— ( i ) The 180th day after the proposed termination date; or
( ii ) The 30th day after the date of the PBGC notice that the filing was incomplete.
( 2 ) *For purposes of PBGC review period.* If the standard termination notice is completed under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the PBGC will determine whether the notice will be deemed to have been complete as of the date when originally filed for purposes of determining when the PBGC's review period begins under § 4041.26(a)(1).
( c ) *Additional information* — ( 1 ) *Deadline for providing additional information.* The PBGC may in any case require the submission of additional information relevant to the termination proceeding. Any such additional information becomes part of the standard termination notice and must be submitted within 30 days after the date of a written request by the PBGC, or within a different time period specified therein. The PBGC may in its discretion shorten the time period where it determines that the interests of the PBGC or participants may be prejudiced by a delay in receipt of the information.
( 2 ) *Effect on termination proceeding.* A request for additional information will suspend the running of the PBGC's 60-day review period. The review period will begin running again on the day the required information is received and continue for the greater of— ( i ) The number of days remaining in the review period; or
( ii ) Five regular business days.
§ 417.9 Evidence; contumacious or disorderly conduct. ( a ) Formal rules of evidence or procedure in use in courts of law or equity shall not obtain. Rules of evidence are to be within the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. However, it shall be the policy to exclude testimony or matter which is irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious.
( b ) Contumacious or disorderly conduct at a hearing may be ground for exclusion therefrom. The refusal of a witness at any hearing to answer any questions which have been ruled to be proper shall, in the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge be ground for striking all testimony previously given by such witness on related matter.
( c ) At any stage of the hearing the Administrative Law Judge may call for further evidence or testimony on any matter. After the hearing has been closed, no further information shall be received on any matter, except where provision shall have been made for it at the hearing, or except as the Administrative Law Judge or Director may direct by reopening the hearing.
[29 FR 8264, July 1, 1964, as amended at 29 FR 8480, July 7, 1964; 78 FR 8025, Feb. 5, 2013]
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 Visualant, Incorporated on Form 10-QSB
for the period ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bradley E. Sparks, Chief
Financial Officer and Secretary Treasurer 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 the best of my knowledge and belief:





(1)
            the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities 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/
Bradley E. Sparks


Bradley
E. Sparks


Chief
Financial Officer and Secretary-Treasurer









Date: May
20, 2008