alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

NOT FOR RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION

File Name: 14a0140n.06

No. 13-3570

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

JEFFREY MAYLE, MILDRED KOWELL, )

JAY YOUNG, )

)

Plaintiffs-Appellants, )

)

v. ) ON APPEAL FROM THE

) UNITED STATES DISTRICT

JERRY L. MALOON, in both his official and ) COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN

individual capacities; DAVID R. HUNT, in both ) DISTRICT OF OHIO

his official and individual capacities; )

LISA SMITH, )

)

Defendants-Appellees. )

)

)

BEFORE: SUHRHEINRICH, SILER, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges.

SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge. Jeffrey Mayle, Mildred Kowell, and the estate of 

Jay Young (collectively “Plaintiffs”) appeal the district court’s judgment granting summary 

judgment for defendants Jerry L. Maloon II, David R. Hunt, and Lisa Smith (collectively 

“Defendants”) and dismissing Plaintiffs’ 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 civil rights case.

Plaintiffs claimed that Defendants violated their rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth 

Amendments in obtaining warrants and seizing their property by deliberately including false 

statements and omitting material facts in the affidavits used to obtain the warrants. They 

requested compensatory and punitive damages, as well as equitable relief.

After reviewing both parties’ motions for summary judgment, the district court granted 

summary judgment for Defendants. The court decided that, viewed objectively, Plaintiffs did not 
2

show that Defendants stated a deliberate falsehood or showed reckless disregard for the truth;

that the allegedly false or omitted information was material to the finding of probable cause; or 

that Defendants omitted facts from the affidavit that were critical to the finding of probable 

cause. Further, the court found that defendant Maloon was entitled to qualified immunity 

because he did not participate in drafting or reviewing the warrant affidavits.

Plaintiffs raise the following issues on appeal:

Whether the trial court erred in deciding that Franklin County 

Municipal Court Judge Anne Taylor’s testimony was irrelevant on the issue of 

what evidence was material to probable cause and whether she would have 

granted the search warrants if Defendants had not deliberately omitted 

information in affidavits and had not made misrepresentations about other 

information.

Whether the trial court erred in holding that the omissions and 

misrepresentations were irrelevant on the issue of probable cause and if relevant 

were not material to a finding of probable cause.

Whether the trial court erred in holding that Assistant Attorney 

General Maloon is not responsible for any material omissions or 

misrepresentations in the affidavits for search warrants.

Having reviewed the parties briefs, the applicable law, and the record, and having heard 

oral arguments, we conclude that the district court appropriately disposed of each of the issues 

Plaintiffs raise before this court. Therefore, for the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion 

dated March 29, 2013, we AFFIRM.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

MICHELLE BRAUN, ON BEHALF OF 

HERSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY 

SITUATED,

Petitioner

v.

WAL-MART STORES, INC., A 

DELAWARE CORPORATION, AND 

SAM'S CLUB, AN OPERATING 

SEGMENT OF WAL-MART STORES,

INC.,

Respondents

---------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------

DOLORES HUMMEL, ON BEHALF OF 

HERSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY 

SITUATED,

Petitioner

v.

WAL-MART STORES, INC., A

DELAWARE CORPORATION, AND 

SAM'S CLUB, AN OPERATING 

SEGMENT OF WAL-MART STORES, 

INC.,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 327 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

MICHELLE BRAUN, ON BEHALF OF 

HERSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY 

SITUATED,

:

:

:

:

No. 328 EAL 2018
[327 EAL 2018 and 328 EAL 2018] - 2

Petitioner

v.

WAL-MART STORES, INC., A 

DELAWARE CORPORATION AND SAM'S 

CLUB, AN OPERATING SEGMENT OF 

WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

Respondents

---------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------- DOLORES 

HUMMEL, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF 

AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY 

SITUATED,

Petitioner

v.

WAL-MART STORES, INC., A 

DELAWARE CORPORATION, AND 

SAM'S CLUB, AN OPERATING 

SEGMENT OF WAL-MART STORES, 

INC.,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of December, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
Before the Third Division,

June 10, 1953

No. 57390.

protests 191200-K and 191201-K (Philadelphia).

#### Carson M. Simon & Co. *v.*United States,

Ekwall, Judge:

These cases, consolidated at the trial, are protests against the collector’s assessment of duty on certain cheese imported from Italy at the rate of 25 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 710 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and the trade agreement with Argentina, T. D. 50504. .It is claimed that the merchandise is properly dutiable at 354 cents per pound, but not less than 17H per centum ad valorem under said paragraph 710, as modified by the Annecy Protocol of Terms of Accession of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 52373, and the President’s proclamation of May 13, 1950, T. D. 52476.

*477The pertinent provisions of the tariff act, as modified, are as follows:

> Par. 710 [as modified by the trade agreement with Argentina, T. D. 50504]. Romano, Pecorino, Reggiano, Parmesano, Provoloni, Sbrinz, and Goya cheeses, in original loaves, 50 per lb., but not less than 25% ad valorem.

> Par. 710 [as modified by the Annecy Protocol of Terms of Accession of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 52373]. Cheese * * *:

> ‡ ‡ * ‡ # *%*í[í

> Made from sheep’s milk, in original loaves, and suitable for grating, 3)40 per lb., but not less than 17)4% ad val.

The latter provision became effective as to merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on and after May 30, 1950, by virtue of the President’s proclamation of May 13, 1950, T. D. 52476.

At the trial, it was agreed by counsel that the merchandise involved herein consists of cheese made from sheep’s milk, in original loaves, and suitable for grating.

It was established by the testimony of Maurice Gilbert, deputy collector in charge of the warehouse division at Philadelphia, that 15 cases of cheese out of entry No. 9043, dated October 24, 1949 (protest No. 191200-K) had been withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on and after May 30, 1950, and that 41 cases of cheese out of entry No. 9733, dated December 9, 1949 (protest No. 191201-K), had been withdrawn from warehouse for consumption after May 30, 1950.

On the record herein, we hold that 15 cases of cheese out of entry No. 9043 (protest No. 191200-K) and 41 cases of cheese out of entry No. 9733 (protest No. 191201-K) were withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after May 30, 1950, and that said merchandise is properly dutiable at 3}4 cents per pound, but not less than 1714 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 710 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Annecy Protocol of Terms of Accession of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 52373, and the President’s proclamation of May 13, 1950, T. D. 52476, as cheese made from sheep’s milk, in original loaves, and suitable for grating.

The protests are sustained and judgment will be rendered for the plaintiff.
IB 

Union Calendar No. 539 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8675 

[Report No. 118–642] 

To require the Transportation Security Administration conduct a study relating to the digitization of the law enforcement officer flying armed checkpoint data collection process, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 11, 2024 

Mr. GARBARINO (for himself and Mr. KENNEDY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 

AUGUST 30, 2024 

Additional sponsor: Mr. DAVIS of North Carolina 

AUGUST 30, 2024 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8675 RH

A BILL 

To require the Transportation Security Administration conduct a study relating to the digitization of the law enforcement officer flying armed checkpoint data collection 

process, and for other purposes. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8675 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Repair of the National 

5 Law Enforcement Telecommunications System Act of 

6 2024’’. 

7 SEC. 2. STUDY RELATING TO DIGITIZATION OF THE LAW 

8 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FLYING ARMED 

9 CHECKPOINT DATA COLLECTION PROCESS. 

10 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

11 date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of 

12 the Transportation Security Administration, acting 

13 through the Director of the Federal Air Marshal Service, 

14 shall conduct a study on the digital data collection process 

15 for law enforcement officers who are flying armed. 

16 (b) ELEMENTS.—The study required under sub17 section (a) shall examine the following: 

18 (1) Projected timelines for the digital data col19 lection process referred to in such subsection. 

20 (2) Estimated resources required to implement 

21 such process. 

22 (c) BRIEFING; ACCESSIBILITY.—Upon completion of 

23 the study required under subsection (a), the Administrator 

24 of the Transportation Security Administration shall— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 8675 RH

1 (1) provide to the Committee on Homeland Se2 curity of the House of Representatives and the Com3 mittee on Science, Commerce, and Transportation 

4 and the Committee on Homeland Security and Gov5 ernmental Affairs of the Senate a briefing on the 

6 findings of such study; and 

7 (2) make such study accessible in a digital for8 mat suitable for use by the Administration. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 539 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8675 

[Report No. 118–642] 

A BILL 

To require the Transportation Security Administrapurposes. checkpoint data collection process, and for other of the law enforcement officer flying armed tion conduct a study relating to the digitization 

AUGUST 30, 2024 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Case Wo. 6,400a.

#### GIBSON et al. v. SCULL.

[Hempst. 36.]1

Superior Court, Territory of Arkansas.

April, 1826.

Attachment —Pleading without Special Bail.

Defendants in attachment may appear and plead without entering special bail to the action, and then the property attached is considered as a substitute for bail.

In error to Arkansas circuit court.

[This was an action at law by Hewes Scull .against James M. Gibson and John P. Brown.]

Before JOHNSON and SCOTT, Judges.

OPINION OF

THE COURT.

The only question which we have to consider is whether Gibson and Brown, the defendants in the court below, had the right to appear there and plead to the attachment, without first filing special bail to the action. We have no ■doubt this right is given to defendants in all cases upon attachment. The act of 1S23 (Acts [Ark.] 1823, p. 6) provides “that in all cases upon attachment,. the defendant may appear and plead the same as in other cases, provided that when such defendant does not enter into special bail as is now prescribed by law, the property shall be and remain in the hands of the sheriff until the final determination of the suit.”- From the provisions of the above act we think it clear that defendants in attachment may in all cases appear and plead without giving bail, and that the property attached by the sheriff is considered as a substitute for bail. We are, therefore, of opinion that the court erred in refusing to hear the defendants unless they filed special bail to the action. Reversed.
#### LEVI P. MORTON, Respondent, *v.*THE MANHATTAN BEACH IMPROVEMENT COMPANY (Limited) and Another, Appellants.

*JSjectment*— *separation of a portion of an island from the rest of it, by the action of the*sea— *when the new island so formed will pass by a convey anee purporting to convey the island by its old name.*

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon the trial of this action by the court without a jury.

This action was in ejectment for the recovery of an undivided *267fifth part of a tract of land at Coney Island, in the possession of the defendants. The case states that the plaintiffs remote grantor, with others, was in possession of Barren Island prior to the year 1835. At that time, it is shown by the evidence, that the tract in dispute was a part of that island. The plaintiff traces his title by a regular chain of conveyances from such owner. About the year 1845 the sea broke through Barren Island, separating the tract in question from that island by an inlet. ' About 1861 the old inlet that separated Barren Island from Coney Island closed, and thus the tract formerly part of Barred Island became attached to Coney Island.

The deed to the plaintiff was in 1865, by the sheriff, on a foreclosure of a mortgage executed in 1852, and conveyed the mortgaged premises. The mortgage and the two deeds anterior thereto, by which the mortgagor acquired title, described! the premises conveyed as being Barren Island.

The court at General Term, said: *“*The only question presented on this appeal is whether this tract, after it had been detached by the sea from, the main island, passed under the description of Barren Island. *We*think it did. It. was originally part of that island. After it was cut off by the sea it remained a separate island for twenty-five years, until it was connected with Coney Island. It was during this period that the conveyances in question were made.

*“*Though as a matter of geography the tract became an independent island, still in the absence of any proof that during this time it had acquired a separate designation, we think it should be held that the name Barren Island still included it. The burden of proof was on the defendant to show, if such was the fact, that the tract, after its separation, was known by some other name, otherwise it should be presumed that it was still called by the former title.”

*Alfred G.*Chcvptn, for the appellants.

*Henry G.*Atwater, for the respondent.

Opinion by

Cullen, J.

Present — Barnard, P. J., and Dykman, J.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
EX-32
              SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF JOHN FLEMING


                       SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

In connection with the annual report of GameZnFlix, Inc.
("Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. Section 1350) that to 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 Company.


Dated: April 21, 2009                  /s/ John Fleming
                                       John Fleming,
                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                       (principal executive and
                                       financial officer)
No. 64228.

protests 59/21335 and 59/22499 (Portland, Oreg.).

#### United States Plywood Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

The protests were dismissed.
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 Homeland Security

###### Bureau of Customs and Border Protection 

          - [CBP Dec. 07-11] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. 

# ACTION:

Notice of re-accreditation of Core Laboratories, Inc. of Sulfur, Louisiana, as an accredited commercial laboratory. 

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12, Core Laboratories, Inc., 4025 Oak Lane, Sulfur, Louisiana 60665, has been re-accredited to test Petroleum and Petroleum Products entered under Chapters 17 and 29 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analysis should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific tests this entity is accredited to perform may be directed to the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                         *http://www.cbp.gov/​xp/​ cgov/import/operations_support/labs_scientific_svcs/org_and_operations.xml*.                     

# DATES:

The re-accreditation of Core Laboratories, Inc., as an accredited laboratory became effective on March 23, 2005. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for March 2008. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Eugene J. Bondoc, PhD, or Randall Breaux, Laboratories and Scientific Services, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060. 

Dated: March 22, 2007. 

Ira S. Reese, 

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services. 

 [FR Doc. E7-5705 Filed 3-27-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 857 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 857

  To amend title 31, United States Code, to limit the use of Federal 
  funds for travel by the President if the President's annual budget 
        submission to Congress is late, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2023

Mr. Carter of Georgia (for himself, Ms. Mace, and Mr. Cline) introduced 
 the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight 
and Accountability, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, 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 amend title 31, United States Code, to limit the use of Federal 
  funds for travel by the President if the President's annual budget 
        submission to Congress is late, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Presidential Budget Accountability 
Act''.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS FOR PRESIDENTIAL TRAVEL 
              EXPENSES IF PRESIDENT'S BUDGET IS LATE.

    Section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(j) If the budget under subsection (a) is not submitted to 
Congress on or before the first Monday in February of a year, no 
Federal funds may be obligated or expended for the cost of travel by 
the President during the period beginning on the first Tuesday of 
February of such year and ending on the date the budget is submitted. 
For purposes of this subsection, the term `Federal funds' includes 
amounts made available for--
            ``(1) the expense allowance of the President under section 
        102 of title 3;
            ``(2) travel expenses of the President under section 103 of 
        title 3;
            ``(3) entertainment expenses of the President under section 
        105(d)(3) of title 3; and
            ``(4) subsistence expenses in connection with the travel of 
        the President in section 105(d)(4) of title 3.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**





I,
      Steven
      H. Kane, Chief Executive Officer of Protalex, Inc. (the "Registrant"), do hereby
      certify pursuant to Rule 13a-l4(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
      as
      amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code
      that:





(1)
      the
      Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended May 31, 2007 (the
      "Report"), to which this statement is filed as an exhibit, 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 condition and results of operations of the Registrant.


Dated: July 31, 2007
            By:
            /s/
              Steven H. KaneSteven
              H. KanePresident,
                Chief Executive Officer and
                Director