alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS OF TE XAS N O . P D - 0544- 08
H EC TO R R EN E G A LV EZ, A ppe l l ant

v . THE S TA TE OF TE X AS ON S TATE ’ S PET I TI ON FOR DI S CRETI ON ARY REVI EW FROM THE TENTH CO URT O F AP PEALS

M c LENNAN CO UNTY P ercur i am . O P I N I O N A j ur yfound A ppel l antgui l t yof t w o count s of aggr avat ed s exual as s aul t and the tr i al
cour tas s es s ed puni s hm entatl i fe i m pr i s onm ent . T he C our tof A ppeal s r ev erse d t he
co n v i c t i o n , f

i n d i n g t h a te x t r a n e o u s o f f e n s e e v i d e n c e was i n a d mi s s i b l e b e c a u s e App e l l ant
r ai s ed a de fens e of f

abr i cat i on, but not a cl ai m of "fr ame- up" orr et al i at i on. G al vez v. St at e, N o. 10- 03- 00083- C R ( T ex. A pp. — W aco 2008)
. I n d o ing so , t he C our tof A ppeal s r el i ed on N ew t on v. St at e, N o. 10- 06- 00160- C R ( T ex. A pp. - - W aco 2007) ( unpub. ) , w hi ch i n tur n,GALVEZ- 2

re lie d o n B a s s v . S ta te , 2 2 2 S .W .3 d 5 7 1 , 5 7 6 -7 7 (H o u s to n -- 1 4 th 2 0 0 7 ). T h e S tate h a s f

iled a p e tit io n f

o r d isc re tio n a ry re v iew c o n ten d in g th e C o u rt o f A p p e a ls
err ed i n fi ndi ng evi dence of A ppel l ant ' s extr aneous o ffens es i nadmi s s i bl e t o r ebutt he d ef en sive theo ry o f fa b ri ca ti o n , arg u ing that the f o cu s sh o u ld n o t be o n the tit le of the th eo ry buton t he fa ct s j us t i fy i ng admi s s i on. T h i s C o u r tg r a n t e d d i s c r e t i o n a r yr e v i e w i n B a s s , i n o r d e rt o a d d r e s s t h i s i s s u e . We concl uded that extr aneous offe ns e evi dence i s admi s s i bl e t o r ebut a fabr i cat i on defe ns e, and t hatno cat egor i cal di s t i nct i ons exi s tbetw een s uch defe ns es and "f r ame- up" or"r et al i at i on" defe ns es . B as s v. St at e, S. W
. 3d ( T ex. C r i m . A pp. N os . PD
- 0494- 07, 0495- 07, del i ver ed Sept ember 10, 2008) , s l i p op. at 16- 17. T he A ppel l ant ' s m ot i on for r ehea r i ng w as deni ed on N ovember 26, 2008. T he C our tof A ppeal s i n t he i ns t antcas e di d not have t he benef i t of our
o p in io n in B a ss . A c c o rd in g ly , w e g ra n t th e S tate ’s p e tit io n f o r d isc re tio n a ryre v iew , v a c a te t he j udgm entof t he C our tof A p p ea ls, an d r emand t hi s cas e t o t he C our tof A ppeal s for
con si derat i on i n li gh tof o ur opini on i n B ass.
D el i ver ed: D ece m ber17, 2008 D o N otPubl i s h
No. 47445.

#### Protests 41971-K, etc., of I. C. Isaacs & Co., Inc., et al. (Baltimore, etc.).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8456 

To require the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to implement 

certain recommendations made by the Comptroller General with respect 

to disaster recovery, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 17, 2024 

Ms. JACOBS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee 

on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To require the Administrator of the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency and the Secretary of Housing and 

Urban Development to implement certain recommendations made by the Comptroller General with respect to 

disaster recovery, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. IMPLEMENTATION OF GAO RECOMMENDA4 TIONS. 

5 The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Man6 agement Agency and the Secretary of Housing and Urban 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8456 IH

1 Development shall take such actions as may be necessary 

2 to implement the priority recommendations of the Comp3 troller General of the United States contained in the re4 port published on November 15, 2022 and titled ‘‘Disaster 

5 Recovery: Actions Needed to Improve the Federal Ap6 proach’’ (GAO–23–104956). 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
##### 



MSW ENERGY HOLDINGS LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
(Unaudited, in thousands of dollars)
 For the Nine
    
    
    For the Period From
    
    
    
    For the Period FromMonths Ended
    
    
    June 25 through
    
    
    
    January 1 throughSeptember 30, 2006
    
    
    September 30, 2005
    
    
    
    June 24, 2005EARNINGS:Pre-tax income (loss) from
continuing operations before
minority interests
    
    $
    67,195
    
    
    $
    34,967
    
    
    
    $
    (2,901
    )Add:Fixed charges
    
    
    40,786
    
    
    
    17,280
    
    
    
    
    31,517Earnings, as adjusted
    
    $
    107,981
    
    
    $
    52,247
    
    
    
    $
    28,616FIXED CHARGES:Interest expense
    
    $
    40,786
    
    
    $
    17,280
    
    
    
    $
    31,517Fixed charges
    
    $
    40,786
    
    
    $
    17,280
    
    
    
    $
    31,517RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES:
    
    
    2.65x
    
    
    
    3.02x
    
    
    
    
    0.91x
 42
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. ANTHONY TANZOLA, *ET AL.,*DEFENDANTS-PETITIONERS.

May 25, 1964. Denied.

See same case below: 83 *N. J. Super.*40.

*Mr. Benedict B. Lucchi*and *Mr. Donald R. Conway*for the petitioners.

*Mr. Guy W. Calissi*and *Mr. William C. Brudnich*for the respondent.

On petition for certification to Superior Court, Appellate Division.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Balanced Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of his 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 Balanced Series.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                         
|Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                             
|President and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of Balanced Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund
|



|                                                                                                                             
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                                              
|Brent Bales                                                                                                                  
|Chief Financial Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of Balanced Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund
|

Date: November 26, 2008
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 this Report on Form 10-Q
of Summit Financial Services Group, Inc. (the Company), for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Marshall
T. Leeds, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify, to my knowledge 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Marshall T. Leeds                                       
|Marshall T. Leeds                                           
|Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer
and President
|                                                            
|Dated: May 16, 2011                                         



Page 16
No. 50524.

#### Protest 63495-K of Stoeger Arms Corp. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoice should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on the entry. The protest was sustained to this extent.
Exhibit 32.12

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of the Frontier Masters Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q
for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of his 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 Frontier Masters Series.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                                                                       
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                                     
|Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                                         
|President and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of the Frontier Masters Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund
|                                                                                                                                                       
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                                                                        
|Brent Bales                                                                                                                                            
|Chief Financial Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of the Frontier Masters Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund              

Date: August 14, 2009
## Ferricrete, manganocrete, and bog iron occurrences with selected sedge bogs and active iron bogs and springs in the upper Animas River watershed, San Juan County, Colorado

*By*  Douglas B. Yager, Stanley E. Church, Philip L. Verplanck, *and* Laurie Wirt

thumbnail image of map

Version 1.1

This map was constructed to identify ferricrete
    occurrences  in the upper Animas River watershed. Ferricrete is one 
      indicator of pyrite oxidation and acid rock drainage that 
      have been ongoing in this region since the late Pleistocene.  
      The mapping of ferricrete occurrences increases our 
      understanding of the geochemical baseline conditions that 
      existed in the Animas River watershed prior to mining.  The 
      digital GIS coverages provided may be used to evaluate the 
      spatial relationships among iron-rich ground water, 
      ferricrete occurrences, structure, and alteration 
      assemblages.

---

Metadata 
file (18 KB)

|MF-2406
    PDF file (2.17 MB) | For viewing                                                          
|------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|MF-2406 PDF file (89.92 MB)    | For printing                                                         
|Text Only PDF file (834 KB)    | (This version of the report is accessible as defined in Section 508.)



|mf-2406.tar.gz (522 KB) | mf-2406.zip (513 KB)
|----------------------- | --------------------

---

|AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices                                                                                                                                                               
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey
      URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/mf/2003/mf-2406/
Questions or Assistance: USGS Web Contact
Page Last Modified: Thr Dec  1 12:09 EDT 2016

---
No. 54127.

#### J. E. Bernard & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 106437-K/91442, etc. (Chicago).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The protests were dismissed.
BEFORE the Third Division,

April 19, 1945

No. 50134.

#### Protest 93003-K of Millinery Clearing House, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

Plaintiff’s witness testified that he weighed on his own Fairbanks gram scale 200 dozen hoods out of 50 bales and found same to weigh about 55 grams per hood; that he had a discussion with the examiner as to the correctness of the weights; that he was present with said examiner when two bundles of hats were weighed on three different scales in the appraiser’s stores and each scale showed a different weight. On cross-examination the witness admitted that he did not keep any record of the weights he had taken because he judged that they were all about 55 grams to the hat. The testimony of six witnesses for the Government established that the wool hoods weighed 59.6372 grams each on an average, the scales upon which they were weighed being up to Government standards of weight. The examiner testified that he had weighed two bundles of hats in the presence of plaintiff’s witness on five different scales to test the accuracy of the scale upon which the openers and packers had weighed the merchandise, but, contrary to the testimony of plaintiff’s witness, the bundles weighed the same on all five scales; that the statement' that each scale weighed differently was not true; and that, at the time of the weighing, there was no discussion concerning a difference in the weight upon the various scales. From a careful consideration of the testimony and all the documentary evidence introduced it was held that the importer had clearly failed to establish that the basis of weight used in determining the amount of duty was other than the weight used in liquidation. The protest was therefore overruled.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHI N GTO N , D . C . 20460

OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION MEM O RAN D UM Subject: From: To: S umm ary of S tak eholder Meeting s Ca ri ssa Cy ran Docke ts E PA- H Q-OAR-20 13-0602. E PA- HQ-OAR- 20 13-0603, and EPA-HQOAR-20 13-0495 Thi s memorandum s ummarizes meetings wi th s takeholders during the week o f June 1. 20 1 5. On June 3 . Admi ni strator Gina McCarthy. Ac tin g A ss istant Adm ini strator for Air and Rad iat ion Jan et Mc Cabe and Ass oc iate Assis tant Administrator for C lim ate and Se ni o r Co un se l fo r A ir and Rad iation Jo se ph Goffman pa rticipated in a co nf erence call with Tom Fa r re ll of Domin ion. On June 3 . Assoc ia t e Assis tant Ad mini s tra t o r for C limate and Se ni or Co un se l for Air and R

adiat ion Joseph GoiTman spoke w ith Bru ce Lourie , director of a n independent s ystem ope rator in Ontario , Canada.

I n ter ne t Add r ess (URL) • h tt p // w

w w epa g ov R ecycled / Recyclab l e • Pron t ed w1 th Veget a ble 0•1 Based Inks on 100•,. Postconsume r Process

**Chtor~ne** Free Recycled P aper
1 U NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MARY JO WEIDRICK , ) ) Plaintiff , ) )
v. ) Civil Action No. 22

- 153 1 (UNA) ) ) JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR. ) President of the United States , et al., ) ) Defendant s
. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on review of P laintiff’s pro se C omplaint , Dkt. 1, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), Dkt. 2. In IFP proceedings, the Court is required to dismiss a case “at any time” it determines, as here, t hat the action is frivolous

. 28
U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(i). The p laintiff has again filed a Complaint “ primarily ‘ to allow ’ her ‘t o immediately confer with her attorney of [now 5] years, Mark J. Geragos

. ’ ” Weidrick v. Biden , No. 21

- cv - 416 (UNA),
2021 WL 1099934, at *1 (D.D.C. Mar. 4, 2021), aff'd , 848 F ed . App ’ x 436 (D.C. Cir. 2021) ; see Compl. ¶ 1. She seeks to stop “named and unnamed Defendants daily for ge pro - terrorism material making it appear it is Plaintiff’s , then threaten to arrest Mr. Geragos.” Id

. Plaintiff admits that she has filed at least one “previous lawsuit in 2021/22,” which was “denied by SCOTUS.” Id . ¶ 2. Allegedly, her “sources have indicated seven out of nine SCOTUS Justices are participants in this
terrorism ,” so she has named them as defendants in this action , id ., along with President Biden,2 U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, the United States Military, and the United States Congress , id. at 2

. The instant Complaint , like those dismissed previously, is replete with rehashed allegations of terrorism, sexual assault, slander, and torture

. For example, Plaintiff claims “there are many planks of this 24/7 terrori sm of 32 1/2+ years including but not limited to raping of Plaintiff’s brain with mind reading equipment [.] ” I d . ¶ 7 ; cf

. Weidrick , supra at *1 ( concluding that complaint alleging same “ satisfies [the frivolous] standard .”) (surveying cases) ) ; Weidrick v. Biden , No. 21

-

cv - 2224 (UNA), 2021 WL 6621164, at *1 (D.D.C. Sept. 23, 2021), aff'd , No. 21

- 5247, 2022 WL 190758 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 18, 2022) (“ Upon careful review of the [similarly pled] complaint, the Court concludes that its factual allegations are irrational or wholly incredible, rendering this case subject to dismissal as frivolous. ”); Weidrick v. Obama , No. 12

- cv - 0944, 2012 WL 2308103, at *1 (D.D.C. June 11, 2012) (“ Plaintiff's outla ndish accusations [of stalking and mind control] are the type of fantastic or delusional scenarios warranting dismissal under § 1915(e)(2) as frivolous. ”). Consequently, this case will be dismissed with prejudice. See Firestone v. Firestone , 76 F.3d
1205 , 1209 (D.C. Cir. 1996) ( holding that dismissal with prejudice is warranted upon determining “that ‘the allegation of other facts consistent with the challenged pleading could not possibly cure the deficiency’” (quoting Jarrell v. United States Postal Serv

. , 753 F.2d 1088, 1091 (D.C. Cir. 1985)) )

. A separate order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

_________/s/_________

____ DABNEY L. FRIEDRICH Date: June 27 , 2022 United States District Judge
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00203-CR

Candace Orn, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF Caldwell COUNTY, 421st JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 12-095, HONORABLE TODD. A. BLOMERTH, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s brief was originally due September 11, 2013. When no brief was filed,

this Court’s clerk sent notice to appellant’s counsel, Howard S. Jenkins, informing him that the brief

was overdue. In response, Jenkins filed a motion requesting an extension of time to file the brief,

which this Court granted in part. Subsequently, Jenkins filed two additional motions requesting an

extension of time to file the brief, which this Court also granted. In granting the last motion, this

Court extended the deadline until January 2, 2014, and indicated that no further extensions would

be granted. No brief was filed. This Court’s clerk again sent notice to Jenkins informing him that

the brief was again overdue. In response, Jenkins has filed a fourth motion requesting an extension

of time to file the brief.
We deny the motion. We hereby order appellant’s counsel, Howard S. Jenkins, to

tender a brief in this cause no later than February 11, 2014. Failure to file the brief by that date will

result in counsel being called before this Court to show cause why he should not be held in contempt

for violating this order.

It is so ordered on this the 27th day of January, 2014.

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Rose

2
No. 52377.

protests 687339-K, etc. (Seattle).

#### Fisheries Supply Co. et al. *v.*United States,

*333Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise consist of imitation gut similar in all material respects to that the classification of which was involved in *Bush*v. *United States*(34 C. C. P. A. 17, C. A. D. 338). Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact and following the cited authority, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.